Sophoan Sorn

Healthcare Prof:

A rule proposed by HHS that would allow wellness care providers who receive federal grants to opt out of care based on their ethical or spiritual beliefs “has provoked a torrent of objections,” including a “strenuous protest” from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which enforces job discrimination legal guidelines, the New York Times reports. In accordance with the Times, three EEOC officials — including its legal counsel, whom President Bush appointed — said the proposal would upend four decades of civil legal rights law prohibiting job discrimination based on religion. The proposed rule states that providers could not require employees with moral or spiritual objections to “assist inside the performance of any part of a health support program or research activity” financed by HHS. The rule also would prohibit recipients of federal money from discriminating against well being care workers who refuse to take part in abortion or sterilization procedures due to the fact of “religious belief or moral convictions.”

The EEOC counsel, Reed Russell, and two Democratic members of the commission, Stuart Ishimaru and Christine Griffin, said the rule is unnecessary for employee protection and potentially confusing to employers. In addition, Russell said that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 already prohibits employment discrimination based on religion and which the courts have defined “religion” broadly to include “moral or ethical beliefs as to what is proper and wrong, which are seriously held together with the strength of traditional spiritual values.” Furthermore, under the Civil Rights Act, all employers must make reasonable accommodations for an employee’s spiritual practices, unless the employer can show that doing so would cause “undue hardship within the conduct of its business,” the Times reports. In a letter commenting on the proposal, Ishimaru and Griffin said that 40 years of court decisions have carefully balanced “employees’ rights to religious independence and employers’ business needs” and which the proposed rule “would throw this entire body of law into question.”

According to Ishimaru and senior members of the commission staff, neither HHS nor the White House consulted with EEOC prior to issuing the proposed regulation on Aug. 21. According to a government Web site that tracks the rule-making process, the White House Office of Management and Budget both received and cleared the proposal on that day.

The Occasions reports that President-elect Barack Obama has said the rule would make it difficult for females to access reproductive wellness solutions this kind of as abortion and some contraceptives. HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt said that is not the purpose with the regulation. Rather, he said, it would increase compliance with laws adopted considering that 1973 to protect wellness care workers. Leavitt added, “Federal legislation is explicit and unwavering in protecting federally funded medical practitioners from becoming coerced into providing treatments they find morally objectionable.”

HHS officials said they plan to issue a final version with the rule inside days, in accordance with the Times. Aides and advisers to Obama said he would try to rescind it, a process that could take 3 to six months. Although the Bush administration in Might said that new regulations should be proposed by June 1 and issued by Nov. 1, the HHS rule missed both deadlines, the Times reports. A White House directive allows the deadlines to be waived “in extraordinary circumstances,” but Bush administration officials were unable to say immediately whether this case would justify an exception.

Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association — which, along with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, supports the proposal — said that in recent years, “we have noticed a variety of efforts to force Catholic and other well being care providers to carry out or refer for abortions or sterilizations.” Even so, the Nationwide Association of Chain Drug Stores, the American Hospital Association, the American Health care Association, 28 senators, more than 110 representatives and the attorneys general of 13 states have referred to as on the Bush administration to withdraw the proposed rule, the Times reports. Pharmacies said the rule would allow their employees to refuse to fill prescriptions for contraceptives and could “lead to Medicaid patients becoming turned away.” State officials also said the rule could void state laws that require insurance plans to cover contraceptives and require hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape survivors, based on the Times. In addition, the Ohio Wellness Department said the rule “could force family planning providers to hire employees who may refuse to do their jobs.” Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, has raised similar worries (Pear, New York Times, 11/18).

Reprinted with type permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. It is possible to look at the entire Day-to-day Women’s Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery right here. The Daily Women’s Wellness Coverage Report is actually a cost-free service with the National Partnership for Females & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2008 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.