Abstract
Over the years of my involvement in obstetrics and gynecology, and reproductive medicine and surgery I have had the opportunity to see, first hand, how the religious liberties of individual physicians, medical students, nurses, patients, etc., have been violated by the contemporary trends in reproductive medicine. Since the advent of oral contraceptives, the practice of obstetrics and gynecology as it relates to procreative medicine has dramatically changed. Contraception, sterilization, abortion and in vitro fertilization are the foundation upon which reproductive medicine decision making is made. These decisions are often made with a "steam roller effect" which is completely devoid of any consent from those who are impacted by the implementation of those decisions. It has been an interesting series of events to watch over these years as the profession has become less and less diagnostically attuned and more and more "band aid" oriented. The birth control pill is used for the treatment of almost every gynecologic malady known, even though it cures none of them. Family physicians, internists, pediatricians and others tend to follow the same approach as their OB-GYN colleagues. With in vitro fertilization, instead of finding out what the underlying cause of one's infertility or reproductive problem might be, there is a "jumping over" of the underlying causes (the diseases) and a pursuit directly to a solution which first of all is very expensive, second, is not very effective and third, is considered to be highly immoral and unethical by many people in our society.
Hilgers religious liberty reproductive medicine conscience, free exercise clause reproductive medicine physicians, conscientious objection contraception sterilization abortion, NaProTECHNOLOGY alternative to IVF ethical medicine, Hilgers TW birth control pill diagnostic limitations OB-GYN, religious freedom medical students nurses reproductive care, ethical objections in vitro fertilization contraception, reproductive medicine constitutional rights physicians, oral contraceptives band aid gynecology treatment critique, infertility treatment underlying causes versus IVF
PMID 12817595 12817595 DOI 10.1080/20508549.2002.11877634 10.1080/20508549.2002.11877634
Keywords
Abortion, Induced, Attitude of Health Personnel, Catholicism, Civil Rights, Contraception, Female, Hospitals, State, Humans, Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Hospital, Pregnancy, Prejudice, Religion and Medicine, Reproductive Medicine/legislation & Jurisprudence, Reproductive Techniques, Assisted, Sterilization, Reproductive, United States, First Amendment, Genetics and Reproduction, Legal Approach, Religious Approach