Does Religious Freedom Supercede Gender Identity?

This bill is actually about resident abuse in elder care facilities and how Medicaid/ Medicare inspectors are to interpret and verify complaints when a staff member routinely refuses to address residents by their chosen pronoun or name as documented in their care plan or chart, consistent with resident dignity, resident rights to determine their own lives, and consistent with a doctor's diagnosis and treatment plan as described in his orders. https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Transmittals/Downloads/R157SOMA.pdf There are actually three separate issues here.

First there is a duty as proscribed by federal regulation by facilities to ensure the dignity and individuality of residents in long term care, memory care etc.​

§483.15(a) - Dignity
The facility must promote care for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintains or enhances each resident’s dignity and respect in full recognition of his or her individuality.
Interpretive Guidelines: §483.15(a)
“Dignity” means that in their interactions with residents, staff carries out activities that assist the resident to maintain and enhance his/her self-esteem and self-worth....
• Respecting residents by speaking respectfully, addressing the resident with a name of the resident’s choice, avoiding use of labels for residents such as “feeders,” not excluding residents from conversations or discussing residents in community settings in which others can overhear private information
• Focusing on residents as individuals when they talk to them and addressing residents as individuals when providing care and services;
• Focusing on residents as individuals when they talk to them and addressing residents as individuals when providing care and services;

Then there is this language in

§483.15(b) - Self-Determination and Participation
The resident has the right to--
(1) Choose activities, schedules, and health care consistent with his or her interests, assessments, and plans of care;
(2) Interact with members of the community both inside and outside the facility; and
(3) Make choices about aspects of his or her life in the facility that are significant to the resident.
Intent: §483.15(b)
The intent of this requirement is to specify that the facility must create an environment that is respectful of the right of each resident to exercise his or her autonomy regarding what the resident considers to be important facets of his or her life. This includes actively seeking information from the resident regarding significant interests and preferences in order to provide necessary assistance to help residents fulfill their choices over aspects of their lives in the facility.

Now before we decide to worry about 'lies etc'. I refer you to the following interpretative guideline used by surveyers to determine if facilities are complying with this section. It deals with a specific diagnosis which envisions a contradiction between a resident's perception and the facilities perception of facts.

"Determine if staff members respond in a dignified manner to residents with cognitive impairments, such as not contradicting what residents are saying, and addressing what residents are trying to express (the agenda) behind their behavior. For example, a resident with dementia may be attempting to exit the building in the afternoon, but the actual intent is a desire to meet her children at the school bus, as she did when a young mother. Allowing the behavior under supervision such as walking with the resident without challenging or disputing the resident’s intent and conversing with the resident about the desire (tell me about your children) may assist the behavior to dissipate, and the staff member can then invite the resident to come along to have a drink or snack or participate in a task or activity.

Here is some more language in the same guidelines. .
"The concept of individualized intervention has evolved over the years. Many activity professionals have abandoned generic interventions such as “reality orientation” and large-group activities that include residents with different levels of strengths and needs. In their place, individualized interventions have been developed based upon the assessment of the resident’s history, preferences, strengths, and needs. These interventions have changed from the idea of “age-appropriate” activities to promoting “person-appropriate” activities. For example, one person may care for a doll or stroke a stuffed animal, another person may be inclined to reminisce about dolls or stuffed animals they once had, while someone else may enjoy petting a dog but will not be interested in inanimate objects. The surveyor observing these interventions should determine if the facility selected them in response to the resident’s history and preferences. Many activities can be adapted in various ways to accommodate the resident’s change in functioning due to physical or cognitive limitations.

Now that gets us to problem 3. if there is a gender dysphoria diagnosis in the medical chart, and the personal physician of record, recommends the recognition of a male identity regardless of genetic disposition, it is not up to the facility or the staff to dispute either the diagnosis or treatment plan sitting in the medical record.

https://www.aappublications.org/news/2016/06/16/HITGender061616
In response to any perceived ambiguity, the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education released joint guidance on May 13 to clarify that both agencies treat a student’s gender identity as the student’s sex for the purposes of enforcing Title IX. While this guidance does not have the effect of law, it defines and distinguishes “gender identity” from “sex assigned at birth” and emphasizes the importance of using names and pronouns that correspond to a student’s gender identity.

In the clinical setting, it is no less important for health care professionals to record patients’ sex and gender identity accurately. Transgender patients are known to face health disparities, and lack of adherence to preferred names and pronouns can lead to embarrassment and even discrimination in health care.

In other words, you can keep your religious principles by quitting your job, but you can't deprive residents of their rights while you insult them with your religious truth. Its not your job to decide what is true. Its your job to take care of these patients as they determine their needs are best met. If the facilities don't get this right, and enforce these, they get shut down.

 

It is NOT your job to judge others and condemn them for not adhering to your personal beliefs.

In essence you are DEMANDING that others must bow to YOUR beliefs.

To put this in the simplest of terms YOUR rights END where the rights of others BEGIN.

You can BELIEVE whatever you want but you do NOT get to IMPOSE your beliefs on anyone else.

If they want to be KNOWN by a female name that is THEIR right, NOT yours.

You are NOT "violating" any of your own beliefs by calling them by the name that they chose for themself.

Instead you are RESPECTING their individual rights and OBEYING the commandment to do unto others.

 

Neither am I which is why I am an Atheist.

 

He has every right to use whatever label he wants for whoever he wants. , but he does not have the right to be paid by an employer while he does so, or do so in a health care setting on property he does not own, while he does it.

 

Great, then you dont play some delusional game, when a person with a penis, puts on a dress and pretends to be a women.

 

Its not up to you to decide what is a delusion or a hallucination, nor is it up to you to decide how to handle either in a clinical setting. These people have doctors and diagnosis and those doctors get to decide what is or is not delusional behavior according to their medical judgement based on clinical data sitting in the medical record, and their professional assessment. Then they get to decide on possible interventions. If they say there is a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, then that is their diagnosis. If they say the treatment includes respecting the chosen gender identity of the resident, then respect it you shall, as long as you remain employed at the health care setting.

If you can't respect resident rights to determine their own lives and choices, and you cannot implement doctor orders, then get the hell away from the resident. Its their home, their life and their care, not yours.

 

You forgot to call me a "science denier". I learned basic biology, long ago. Are you imagining, I am a doctor in a delusional persons home?

 

No. I am imagining that you are not remotely aware of the duties health care professionals have, to respect the autonomy, the life choices and the dignity of patients or residents. you sure don't seem to understand that these people have actual physicians that see these patients and assess their clinical needs and your opinion is less than irrelevant to any party involved.

You need to stay away from them, if you expect to replace their truth with yours. Nobody cares about your truth. Its not your body or your mind.

 

As I also pointed out it goes further than that. We are told not to lie or engage in deceit THROUGHOUT the Bible. If your lie is about saving someone’s life then you can defend that position before god. Engaging in the deceit of asserting a man is a woman... I’m not sure you’re going to be able to make that defense before God successfully.

 

Because we have freedom of religion. Our founders were smart.

 

Why not?

Your deity is responsible for "creating" that person's identity and must have had a reason for doing so. Who are YOU to decide that what your deity did was wrong?

 

No my assertion was once they get resat and the liberals didn’t have a majority with the swing vote they would. Which don’t worry. It’s coming. I anticipate trump will seat two more scotus appointees before his next term is up.

 

God also created people with the propensity to be attracted to children, that doesn’t mean that acting upon that desire is acceptable.

 

Oh I go back too far for you to sell that story to, but I digress! I had a lot of fun back then. that is not the topic of this thread.

 

Not unconditionally though, otherwise people would be free to rape, steal or murder as long as they said they were following their religious rules. Religion doesn’t grant you more freedom than anyone else, it’s just shouldn’t be used as a reason to grant you less.

Anyway, you’ve still not explained why I should be forced to acknowledge your religious beliefs if my religion declares yours false.

 

Either way it’s going to happen. It’s just a matter of time. I will admit that it’s taken longer than I expected for Americans to get tired of homosexuals and the like but with their push to inundate all Americans and schools with their propaganda and attempts to force women to use changing rooms and bathrooms with men, it’s coming. Don’t worry.

 

So society OVERRULES your deity now?

Glad to hear that.

Society is now overruling your deity as far as gender identity is concerned too.

Looks like your deity screws up a lot and it is up to society to sort out his screwups.

Got it!

 

Because as you just pointed out freedom of religion means that whether you agree with my religion or not you have no right to force me to act in a way which violates those religious beliefs. You can believe whatever you’d like but you can’t make me believe it.

And you can’t force me to violate my religion based upon your delusion.

 

What are you talking about? God didn’t screw up. God creates people with all sorts of issues. They are expected to OVERCOME those problems. Not engage in them.

 

Sure we can. Just try to kill someone in the name of your God, see how fast you end up on death row. Nobody cares if you are sincere and devout if you break the law.

 

So NOW you are saying that your deity screws up ON PURPOSE just to PUNISH people?

Your deity is one sick dude!

 

As long as my religion does not bring actual demonstrable harm upon another individual you have NO right to stop me from following.

 

I’m telling you it’s not a screw up. It’s on purpose. We all have things we must overcome in this life.

 

I don't. Your employer does on their time, on their property, consistent with obeying the federal laws and guidelines designed to protect elder residents from abuse or neglect. If you don't think that includes protecting their right to personal dignity, and choice in a health care setting you are wrong.