Swedish midwife loses fight to be exempt from performing abortions

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Swedish midwife loses fight to be exempt from performing abortions

    A Swedish midwife on Wednesday lost her years-long legal battle to be exempt from performing abortions -- an act she says violates her religious freedom -- and is now considering a final push before the European Court of Human Rights.

    Midwife Ellinor Grimmark objects to abortions because of her Christian beliefs. But the Swedish Labor Court decided that midwives are obligated to make a choice between conscience and career -- contradicting international law, which protects conscientious objection, experts say.


    According to the organization Scandinavian Human Rights Lawyers, "freedom of conscience" is a human right stating that no one shall be deprived of their ability to work in their profession because that person -- by ethical, moral or religious reasons -- cannot perform a task that “extinguishes human life” at its beginning, or final stages.

    “Restrictions on the right to freedom of conscience must be supported by law and be necessary in a democratic society,” Scandinavian Human Rights Lawyers said after the appeals court decision in Grimmark's case.

    In November 2015, a district court found that Grimmark’s right to freedom of conscience had not been violated, and required her to pay the local government’s legal costs, which totaled more than $100,000.

    Grimmark has been commuting to Norway, where midwives and doctors are granted freedom of conscience, according to the human rights group.

    “The Court has failed to protect Ellinor Grimmark’s fundamental right to freedom of conscience despite the clear legal protections that exist in international law,” Robert Clark, Director of European Advocacy for ADF International, an organization that advocates for the right of people to freely live out their faith, said in a statement. “Some have attempted to frame this case as one that pits one human right against another -- however, the only person whose rights have been violated is Ellinor Grimmark.”

    According to ADF, three different medical clinics in the district of Jönköping had refused to employ Grimmark because she would not assist with abortions due to her belief in the “dignity of human life.”

    Grimmark must now decide whether or not to pursue her case before the European Court of Human Rights.
    Swedish midwife loses fight to be exempt from performing abortions | Fox News

    I wonder if American health care workers might be facing the same problem as this midwife if Hillary Clinton had been elected.
    Clyde Herrin's Blog

  • #2
    I mean I can see why she would fight it as it is against her beliefs but it is also part of what is required to be done by her job. If she truly does not want to take part in abortions then she should quit as a nurse and look for another job that aligns with her beliefs. Personally, I would not feel safe if there was a midwife helping me with an abortion if she did not want to do it.
    Comment>

    • #3
      Originally posted by kingcool52 View Post
      If she truly does not want to take part in abortions then she should quit as a nurse and look for another job that aligns with her beliefs.
      If everyone did that the nursing profession would consist entirely of people who were willing to help murder unborn babies. The purpose of nursing is to help those who are ill and bring healing, not death. We must take a stand against evil, not just run away and leave the field to others.
      Clyde Herrin's Blog
      Comment>

      • #4
        Originally posted by theophilus View Post

        If everyone did that the nursing profession would consist entirely of people who were willing to help murder unborn babies. The purpose of nursing is to help those who are ill and bring healing, not death. We must take a stand against evil, not just run away and leave the field to others.
        I understand that is your opinion which is fair enough. But there are others that do not find abortion as a sin and are fine to take part in it as a nurse. The job of a nurse requires you to take part in abortions. Let's say there is a doctor that does not agree with homosexual relationships. A patient that is a homosexual requires an immediate operation otherwise he will die. The only doctor available is that doctor. Is it fair for the doctor to say no and not take part in the operation because of his beliefs? He is a doctor and it is his job to save people's lives, not pick and choose who he wants to save.
        Comment>

        • #5
          Originally posted by kingcool52 View Post
          I understand that is your opinion which is fair enough. But there are others that do not find abortion as a sin and are fine to take part in it as a nurse. The job of a nurse requires you to take part in abortions. Let's say there is a doctor that does not agree with homosexual relationships. A patient that is a homosexual requires an immediate operation otherwise he will die. The only doctor available is that doctor. Is it fair for the doctor to say no and not take part in the operation because of his beliefs? He is a doctor and it is his job to save people's lives, not pick and choose who he wants to save.
          The issue is very simple. Except to save the mother's life, if you believe that the unborn is an innocent human being, then there can be no moral justification for an abortion. No one's personal preference can override a moral imperative.

          Moreover your example is flawed for two reasons. First, in the case of homosexuals, or murderers, or whatever, the doctor or nurse is not being asked to kill. That is the point. Not agreeing with someone and therefore allowing that person to die would be wrong and certainly not the same thing as asking a doctor or nurse to perform an abortion which is the intentional taking of a life. Second, you stated it is a doctor's "job to save people's lives, not pick and choose who he wants to save." Yet you find it acceptable that a doctor should be ask to kill the unborn and accept that. That is an awful inconsistency and refutes the very point you were trying to make.
          Last edited by Origen; 04-24-2017, 11:44 AM.
          Comment>

          • #6
            Sweden is an Atheist country and it is kind of weird that they protect the Muslims over Christians more. if she is Muslim, she would have won her case because the Swedish court will be afraid from the outrage of the Muslim community. It is not the same with Swedish Christians, some of them have to stay inside the closet to avoid being ridiculed by this "Politically correct" super secular country.
            Comment>

            • #7
              I feel sorry for her. It is one's decision to choose between conscience once and career. I think she must be true to herself despite the circumstances. Whatever the law may be just stay strong.
              Comment>

              • #8
                Muslims are complaining about Islamophobia but Christianophobia is actually more rampant in modern societies because Christians don't have the protection from discrimination from these so called liberals.
                Comment>
                Working...
                X
                Articles - News - SiteMap