• The right to freedom of religion is not unlimited; it is subject to such limitations as are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, morals or the fundamental rights or freedoms of others;
And doctors don't just have to abide by the Ontario Human Rights Code. The College itself might get on their case for professional misconduct. When refusing to treat a patient on account of their (the physician's) religious beliefs, for example, doctors must:
• Provide information about all clinical options that may be available or appropriate based on the patient’s clinical needs or concerns. Physicians must not withhold information about the existence of a procedure or treatment because providing that procedure or giving advice about it conflicts with their religious or moral beliefs.
And what of it? Flanders seems to feel it would be okay for a doctor to lie in the name of the Bearded Sky-Monster. Why? The law is the law. Everyone else has to obey it.
2 comments:
If they can't do their job, they should stop be3iong doctors. And Flanders should take a long walk off a short pier.
A guy who believes in demonic possession should not give advice to anyone on anything.
Interestlingly, the only "physician" to have considered himself above the law was Morgentaler. But of course, his thumbing his nose at our legal systme was taking a stand in the name of "justice". Oh, the irony.
Secondly, the College has limited authority to adjudicate on matters of conscience. Freedom of religion and the freedom to practise it privately and publicly is a right that can not be extinguished by the College simply because it wishes it so.
As the College says in BCL's first link:
". . .the College does not have the expertise or the authority to make complex,
new determinations of human rights law . . ."
Agreed. The College has very limited authority in this area.
Post a Comment