HB 1153 another sad sign of the times

We’ve spent the last two weeks praising potential legislation coming out of Pierre during this year’s legislative session, so it was probably only a matter of time before we saw one that caught our eye in the other direction. In other words, one that says, “what is this dumb idea?”
Such is the case with proposed House Bill 1153, which, if it becomes law, would allow healthcare providers to remove themselves from services based on ethical, moral  or religious beliefs or principles. In other words, a doctor could theoretically decide they don’t like the color of your hair, your nose ring, your jean shorts, etc., that you’re Jewish, Catholic, whatever, and decide they aren’t going to treat you based upon these carved out exceptions. Why?
Now, it’s important to note, the bill does prohibit the denial of services for emergencies, discrimination, and any existing rules providers are already obligated to follow. Well, it prohibits those on its face, technically. But how would you ever prove discrimination? How far removed are we from going down that road if this legislation is allowed to stand? Are we going to get to a point where a doctor in a conservative state sees blue hair and objects to treating the person because they might be a democrat? What about a surgeon in a liberal state who has a heart attack victim wheeled into the ER who is wearing a MAGA hat and says, “nah, not helping him.”
Don’t laugh at these scenarios. Take a look around you and the state of our society. These are not as far-fetched of a situation as they should be, unfortunately.
Make no mistake, this bill is purely political. This is another attack on controversial, elective procedures such as gender reassignment, etc. If you don’t believe in those and don’t want to be a part of those, wonderful. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water.
We can go way back to the time when a cake maker (we forget where) refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Whether or not you agree with that, we can agree that providing life-saving medicine or even a routine checkup that finds something serious is a touch more important than writing on a cake in frosting. Everything starts out small and narrow in scope. It’s a slippery slope.
In some professions, you give up your right to refuse service to anyone. Surgeons in war zones try to save the lives of enemy combatants who were just trying to kill their friends. Mass killers who are wounded have their lives saved. It’s why someone goes into medicine. They want to help. It’s the entire basis of the hippocratic oath.
“It (House Bill 1153) ignores the rights and needs of patients who come to providers seeking medical treatment. It is undisputed that this bill makes a patient’s rights and needs secondary to whatever subjective conscious principles his treater might claim,” Justin Smith, a lobbyist for Greater Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce, said.
This bill would be bad policy that seems narrow, but likely is being sought to get a foot into the door to something larger, in our mind. Let’s not start letting doctors pick and choose who they work on based on the way the wind is blowing.