Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Hospital merger could interrupt efforts to reduce number of poor people in Kentucky

A merger plan now slated to go forward between a university hospital, a Jewish hospital, and two Catholic hospitals in Kentucky could result in an interruption in the effort to reduce the number of poor people through abortion, sterilization, and artificial birth control as well as place more burdensome restrictions on hospitals denying comatose and dying patients food and water.

"These are major issues related to women's health at the hospital that provides the greatest amount of care for indigents in the city," intoned the editorial writers at the Louisville Courier-Journal, who support the indigent control policies that would care the city's poor into oblivion.

Several liberal state lawmakers, women's groups, state attorney general Jack Conway, and the state's largest newspaper--all welling with compassion for the poor--are in a major league snit over a proposed merger between University of Louisville hospital and Louisville's Jewish Hospital, and two Catholic hospitals, St. Josephs and St. Mary's that could result in fewer "reproductive" services that are designed to minimize reproduction of poor people.

"Louisville hospital merger probably means poor women won't get their tubes tied at University Hospital," declared a headline of a July 19th story at Kentucky Health News.

A July 23 story in the Louisville Courier-Journal voiced the concern about the prospect of having too many poor people underfoot:
Dismay over the merger's possible effect on reproductive care led more than 450 people to sign a newspaper advertisement asking officials to change the merger's terms. Catholic rules forbid sterilization, non-natural birth control and abortions — meaning, for example, that low-income women or those with high-risk pregnancies could not get a tubal ligation at University at the same time as their delivery.
According to the Kentucky Commission on Women, a left-wing advocacy group funded by Kentucky taxpayers, in a letter to the editor today in the CJ, "Many low-income patients rely on access to sterilization after multiple births as a common method of contraception." The Kentucky Commission on Women has a link on their website to Planned Parenthood, whose founder, Margaret Sanger, once said, in caring and compassionate tones, ""More children from the fit, less from the unfit--that is the chief aim of birth control."

Caring liberals are also concerned about restrictions on mercy killing. A CJ story on July 23 discussed concerns about a directive in Catholic hospitals that "says there is normally an obligation to give patients food and water, including those in a 'persistent vegetative state'."

And speaking of people in a persistently vegetative state, today's CJ editorial of took U of L President James Ramsey to task for his most recent attempt at damage control gone haywire:
In Mr. Ramsey's case, the pattern of evasiveness — or outright scorn — for questions has seriously eroded his level of respect and support. Remember the early days of the scandals over former education dean Robert Felner? Interviewed by a WHAS reporter, Mr. Ramsey dismissed the allegations as “anonymous crap.” Mr. Felner now is in the penitentiary for defrauding U of L and another university. And Mr. Ramsey won't discuss the debacle at Passport Health Services, which was run by U of L's vice president for health sciences. That individual, Dr. Larry Cook, was forced to resign by the Governor, yet is being sent on a year's retooling at the rate of nearly $1 million.
Yes, we do remember the Felner scandal. We also remember the CJ dragging its feet in bringing it to light, allowing Jake Payne at Page One, Kentucky to scoop them at every turn. Intrepid these people are not.

So, let's see, we have a "Commission on Women" that is nothing more than a tax-funded left-wing advocacy group that promotes the nation's largest abortion provider, James Ramsey whose attempts at dealing with crises makes the Keystone Kops look positively sophisticated, The Courier-Journal editorial board who has memory lapses when it comes to its own journalistic lapses, and then there's State Rep. Tom Burch, the chairman of the House Health and Welfare Committee who was recently found guilty of ethics violations.

Oh, and did we forget Mayor Fischer, who recently issued an order on domestic partner benefits in Louisville with absolutely no public input?

These are the people now lecturing the hospitals on how to do things properly. But they are caring and compassionate people who love the poor so much that they are willing to go the extra mile in making sure they can help them limit their population.

Go Cards.

4 comments:

One Brow said...

Thank goodness people like Martin Cothran are around to force women to have children they don't want, help to perpetuate poverty. Bravo!

Anonymous said...

Im with ya Cothran!

KyCobb said...

The way to show our compassion for the poor is to force them to have babies they can't support, and eliminate all programs designed to help them make ends meet. I'd love Martin to explain the logic behind that kind of thinking.

Singring said...

My favourite part:

'The Kentucky Commission on Women has a link on their website to Planned Parenthood, whose founder, Margaret Sanger, once said, in caring and compassionate tones, ""More children from the fit, less from the unfit--that is the chief aim of birth control."'

Nice one, Martin. They have a link to an organization that was (partly) founded 90 years ago by a woman who made some rather abhorrent and euthanistsic statements in 1919.

Awesome. That's like the six degrees of Kevin Bacon version of guilt by association.

Let's ee, I'm sure I can play this with game with this blog as well.

Ah, yes, took me about two minutes (and mine is 40 years more recent - Yay!).

Vital Remnants links to the National Review. The National was founded by William F. Buckley in 1955. William F. Buckley on white supremacy in the South in one charming editorial from 1957 ('Why the South must prevail'):

'"the central question that emerges... is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes – the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race."'

So what can we take from this? I'm not quite sure. Martin is the one who thinks that a link to an organization that was founded by someone with rather outdated and repugnant views is somehow significant enough to warrant inclusion in a blog post.

So I think we should leave it to him to explain...