October 14, 2008
Sanford Health internal memo - "we oppose what we support"
UPDATED - See below
An internal memo opposing SD's Initiated Measure 11 circulated Sanford Health here in Sioux Falls today. The Argus Leader reports the memo was from their "lawyers" who say (IM11's) exceptions… “on their face, appear to cover other instances in which pregnancies are permitted to be terminated in accordance with Sanford policy, Initiated Measure 11, if approved, will have substantial legal implications for Sanford Health and its providers...’’
VoteYesForLife makes some interesting points…
…the law (IM11) and Sanfordʼs policy on abortion are in alignment. Sanford does not perform abortion on demand; rather in cases when a motherʼs life and health are at risk. Doctors are completely protected under Measure 11. It is designed to end abortion as birth control, with very clear exceptions for instances when abortion is used to preserve the health and life of the mother. It was clearly written to protect doctors in these rare cases. We do not understand why Sanford would not be in support of Measure 11 when their policies, which are the normal, accepted standard of care, are covered in Measure 11.
Vote Yes accurately points out that Sanford health does not perform abortion as birth control. This law won't change one thing for their doctors. South Dakota's last abortion doctor Dr. Patti Giebink, now member of the SD Physicians for Life, is quoted in the Argus as saying… South Dakota physicians would have no difficulty working within the language of the initiative. This is not a difficult law. It’s actually very doctor friendly.
Nobody's asking me but I'll tell you what I think anyway. Sanford Health is excited to use embyronic stem cells for experimentation, and has skirted SD law to invest 30 million in embryonic stem cell research, despite the fact that there have been NO - that is ZERO - NO cures or benefits uncovered in ANY embryonic stem cell research EVER! They are looking down the road when IM11 does what it was designed to do to Roe v Wade. Without Roe v Wade, they can't tear apart living human embyros. IM11 therefore is a potential threat to their business and this little memo today spreading false fears is evident they'd rather this not pass on November 4.
Amazing how the health exception is suddenly not specific enough. Let's not forget that under Roe and Doe today, a woman can get an abortion for a "health" reason as ridiculous as if she is "anxious" because she won't be able to go to rock concerts anymore with her boyfriend if she has a baby at home.
Here's the health exception for IM11 if you have yet to read it:
Section 4. Health of the Pregnant Woman Exception. No person may be prosecuted under section 2 of this Act if a licensed physician has made a judgment that an abortion is necessary because there is a serious risk of a substantial and irreversible impairment of the functioning of a major bodily organ or system of the pregnant woman should the pregnancy be continued and which risk could be prevented through an abortion, unless in reaching that judgment the physician knowingly disregards accepted standards of medical practice. The basis of that judgment shall be specifically identified and documented in the woman’s medical records.
UPDATE - I just read the memo in it's entirety and here's what I come away thinking… the three lawyers who wrote this are only watching out for their client Sanford. There is no consideration given to the fact that 800 perfectly healthy living babies are getting dismembered without anesthesia in our state and that it's immoral to allow it to continue. This is solely about lawyers and doctors worrying about covering their butts in the remote, remote chance that life would produce a tough case. Their "analysis" of IM11 makes it clear that they'd rather we continue exploiting women and killing children by the hundreds than open up any remote possibility that Sanford Health risk liability.
Comments on Sanford Health internal memo - "we oppose what we support" »
Scott @ 10:45 pm
I think the Sanford memo presents some rather troubling points. In re: the health exception, my read of the memo is that they are saying the abortion ban goes far beyond banning abortion as birth control.
Steve, I am glad you posted the text of the health exception in your post, because that is what the Sanford atorneys take issue with. In the memo, they detail how the health exception requires that physicians determine there is a "serious" risk of "substantial and irreversible impairment" of a major bodily function and that such determination must be consistent with "accepted standards of medical care."
In detailing the issues this presents for Sanford Health, the attorneys conclude as follows: "…the health-of-the-mother exception imposes a standard that is not clearly defined. Medical facilities and providers have learned, through the malpractice arena, that whether a physician's clinical judgment comports with 'accepted standards for medical practice' can be a matter of debate. Initiated Measure 11 borrows the civil litigation standards, which can be ambiguous and subject to different interpretations, and attaches criminal penalties for failing to comply with the potentially vague, undefined standards. As a result, for those instance where a pregnant woman faces uncertain, but potentially very serious health risks, Initiated Measure 11 will req
Scott @ 10:46 pm
require a physician to choose between possibly committing a felony or subjecting a pregnant woman to a higher degree of medical rsik than would otherwise be clinically desired."
It sounds like this situation is much more complicated than Patti Giebink or Vote Yes For Life woudl have us believe.
Nikole @ 8:34 am
I don't think that the issue is more complicated than VYFL or Patti Giebink have implied. In fact, I would be interested in having a lawyer - who is not working for Sanford or any other pro-abort group - read the bill and advise accordingly. I believe that they would say the same thing that Patti Giebink and the other TEAM of doctors have agreed on, which is, this bill does not change the way they will practice medicine.
momoffour @ 8:37 am
There were far more than "3" lawyers who worked on writing IM 11, including Larry Long. I trust their judgment far more than an organization that may have questionable interests in this issue. Also, if this memo was so confidential, yet got into the hand of unhealthy families- makes you wonder what is really going on behind the scenes.
From now on I am going to ask every doctor I see how they would vote for IM. I want to be cared for by a physician who is practicing within the realm of "accepted medical standards" rather than a maverick who believes his or her practice is threatened by them. I hope physicians at Sanford will speak up and tell the public that they are far better physicians than this memo makes them out to be.
Stephanie @ 8:43 am
I know one of these lawyers personally who worked on this draft for Sanford, and trust me he hasn't been in practice very long, which makes me really question the qualifications that these lawyers have, how many bills have they examined in the past (and got right), and where is there paycheck coming from (just in case there are any pressures in what to report). I will put my trust in the lawyers working for VYFL. Now a days when I look at Sanford it is no longer, "What would be the best medical treatment?" instead it's, "What would Denny do?" Hence why I try to take all my business to Avera.
friend @ 9:29 am
So, what this memo is saying is that Sanford physicians don't practice medicine using the accepted standard of care? What are they, mavericks? If they are using accepted standards of care they shouldn't have to worry about "substantial legal implications". Where were these "substantial legal implications" in 2006?
And I love the part where Marv "I (heart)all abortions" Buehner says "let doctors be doctors and lawyers be lawyers" when making reference to a memo he supports from 3 lawyers talking about what doctors should be doing.
momoffour @ 3:54 pm
Found it ironic that the billboard above the VYFL office is a Sanford ad which has in big letters the word "life". What a joke!