A conscience protection rule from the conscienceless
By 
The HHS’ new conscience protections for panty sniffers & cranks rule is out. One way the agency tries to gild this turd is by claiming that stronger conscience protections will mean more medical practitioners, and that will mean more medical care for everyone. Sort of.
The Department expects any decreases in access to care to be outweighed by significant overall increases in access generated by this rule. If the laws that are the subject of this rule are not enforced, many of the exact same people who would face a burden from a denial of access to a particular procedure from a particular doctor or provider would face the potential of receiving no health care at all from that doctor or provider because such providers may limit, or leave, their practices if unable to comply with their religious beliefs or moral convictions. The absence or departure of those providers from the health field does not clearly lead to any increase in other providers who are willing to offer services that are the subject of Federal conscience and anti‐discrimination laws, but is more likely to simply diminish the overall availability of health care services. The burden of not being able to receive any health care clearly outweighs the burden of not being able to receive a particular treatment.
Look, the doctor won’t perform the abortion you want, but he’ll help out at the delivery. Or she won’t help you complete an advance directive, but she’ll visit you in the hospital every day until your family decides to turn off the ventilator. That’s better than nothing, right?
The HHS supports its assertion that conscience protection rules that aren’t strong enough for the right wing are contributing to some sort of health care professional shortage in the usual way: A combination of making shit up and relying on the dodgiest of sources, such as a group called the Christian Medical Association.
More on the rule when my stomach can tolerate it.
