Big thanks to Bob Ellis for setting forth the straight scoop on how a few pro-abortion doctors hi-jacked the South Dakota State Medical Association and manipulated the organization (against the will of it's membership) to suggest all SDSMA docs oppose IM11. They don't. Read Bob's article. So, to recap the last couple weeks, Sanford Health has issued a cease and desist to UNHealthy Families for misrepresenting the fact that they agree with IM11. And, now the SDSMA has tried unsuccessfully so far to get UNHealthy Families to quit misrepresenting their position. As Bob's article explains, word is that the SDSMA is considering litigation on Nov. 3 against UNHealthy Families.
Here are four additional points that I am aware of which I offer to compliment what Bob has posted this morning.
1. At the March 20, 2008 meeting of the SDSMA, the SDSMA voted to take the position of complete neutrality on IM 11 because they knew anything other than complete neutrality would be interpreted by one side or the other as support for or against IM 11.
2. Dr. Marv Buehner and others pushed to have the issue re-addressed at the September SDSMA meeting. Not all the same members were at this meeting. At this meeting the SDSMA voted to oppose IM 11 "solely based on interference by the government in medical practice and restrictions on physician-patient communications." Yet they stated the SDSMA: "reaffirmed its previous position of support for AMA policy that the issue of support of or opposition to abortion is a matter for individuals to decide, based on personal values or beliefs." (The American Medical Association - AMA has a position of complete neutrality on the issue of abortion.) The SDSMA members were never polled about their opinions on this issue before the SDSMA's September position statement came out.
3. Hundreds of members of the SDSMA are opposed to their position statement. This past week, the SDSMA heard from many of these members and pressure was applied to have the SDSMA revert back to their original position taken at the March 20, 2008 meeting. Dr. Cynthia Weaver, SDSMA president would not allow this to occur. Because of this, hundreds of physicians across the state are infuriated with the SDSMA. Some have dropped their membership in the SDSMA, others are considering it. I advise against them dropping membership because those who know right from wrong need to stay in there and stand for the most vulnerable in our midst, the unborn.
4. DakotaCare was founded by the SDSMA about 20 years ago in order to provide an insurance plan that had nearly all the physicians of South Dakota as providers on their roster. As long as a physician is a member of the SDSMA, they do not have to pay any fee for providing care to DakotaCare patients. If, however, you choose not to be a member of the SDSMA, you are required to pay what amounts to a $2000 per year fine. They say this is to encourage membership in the SDSMA. They will not waive this fee for physicians who drop their SDSMA membership over the SDSMA's position on abortion. Because DakotaCare was formed by the SDSMA, the two organizations are incestuously linked. DakotaCare must abide by all the rules and regulations and policy statements of the SDSMA. Thus, DakotaCare, by proxy, must also stand behind the SDSMA's position statement of opposition to IM 11. I'm not sure whether abortions are covered under DakotaCare's policies. You'd have to call them and ask them that question.
Leave a Comment