Catholic Health Initiatives-Iowa, a faith-based health care provider, is arguing in a medical malpractice case that the loss of an unborn child does not equate to the death of a “person” for the purpose of calculating damage awards.

In Iowa, court-ordered awards for noneconomic losses stemming from medical malpractice are capped at $250,000, except in cases that entail the “loss or impairment of mind or body.”

Attorneys for the CHI and MercyOne hospital are arguing the cap on damages still applies in cases where the “loss” is that of a fetus or unborn child.

CHI’s status as a nonprofit, tax-exempt entity is based on its stated mission of providing health services “in the spirit of the gospel.” The ethics guidelines it approved in 2018 state that the corporation is committed to “respect the sacredness of every human life from the moment of conception until death.”

  • Phoenixz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    1 day ago

    Abortion? It’s a person, you murderers!

    We fucked up? Well it’s a fetus, not a person!

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      Well, the problem is that “Faith Based Institutions” are exposed to any amount of liability for anything at all. Obviously, these people were infallible and it was the sinful patients who were at fault.

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 day ago

    There is zero point in ever listening to what a conservative is saying. It changes based on whatever they think is beneficial to them in that exact moment. They’re like the demons from Frieren.

  • melsaskca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 day ago

    Those guys will say almost anything for their weekly free money.

  • Leon@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 day ago

    Catholic Health Initiatives-Iowa, a faith-based health care provider

    A what?

    • CptOblivius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 day ago

      It is a left over system where hospitals were basically run by nuns and churches. Originally done in good faith as there wasn’t any other option, so nuns would double as nurses, staff, etc. That is basically how Mayo clinic started. It is outdated now but many of those hospitals combined to form CHI, Dignity… Some are huge systems.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s who provides medicine in America. Why do you think our media depicts healers as clerics and priests.

      Fr. John gives a hell of a sermon alongside his trademark appendectomy

    • SippyCup@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      CHI is an absolute nightmare to deal with. They will send you to collections almost immediately, they can’t answer any questions about your bills, and seem to routinely fuck them up so bad I’ve had lawyers send them letters twice to get problems resolved.

      Getting the same service from the university medical system in my area suddenly fixed all of the billing issues. Where I was paying out the ass after insurance, suddenly the patient responsibility dropped to damn near 0.

      The ‘Catholic’ part is just a veneer. It’s a for profit medical institution that’s uses religious conviction as another avenue for profit.

  • stormeuh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    1 day ago

    “Faith-based health care provider” is one of the saddest euphemisms I’ve heard in a while.

  • BlameThePeacock
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    315
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Money is far more important than principles. -Modern Christianity

    • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      2 days ago

      “But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!”

      -George Carlin

      • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        2 days ago

        Not really. They banned priest marriage so they could stop paying pensions to widows and would inherit all their property, and throughout the Catholic existence they were selling pardons for sins.

        Even the establishment of Christianity was a cash grab. They gentrified Jesus because Jews weren’t interested in this particular messiah and it was the gentiles who had the cash at the time.

      • Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        I dunno, there was some pretty cool stuff going on in central/south america in the 60s. Ernest cardenal and solentiname come to mind.

        • orange_squeezer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          2 days ago

          Less than twenty years after the Catholic church formed “rat lines” to smuggle Nazis to South America to protect them from prosecution for their crimes against humanity.

        • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah and Jesus was a pretty groovy dude but his religion hoards wealth.

          I remember talking to a historian in Portugal who said she loved the Vatican for its history, but hated it for its opulence.

    • IninewCrow
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      The Christian Schrodinger Fetus … it is neither dead nor alive … worthless nor valuable … you don’t know what it is until you see it and once you do, it is probably already dead

    • Rooty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I’ve encountered many situations of priests having girlfriends, boyfriends and even whole ass families on the side and the parishioners were…okay with it? Like, being celibate is one of the basic prerequisites for your job and you are violating it so casually? No wonder the Catholic church is hemorraging members, this type of in-your-face hipocrisy has become commonplace.

      • NewSocialWhoDis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        The reason behind priests not being allowed to marry originally had nothing to do with their faith though. It’s because Catholic priests were bequeathing church assets to their children when they died. The church just put a thin veneer of dogma on top of the reasoning when they used the dictate of no marriage to stop the theft.

      • Yeather
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 day ago

        That is an even more finicky situation. Roman Catholic priests cannot marry, but Eastern Catholic priests can, and there are exemptions that can be made for Roman Catholic converts. On top of that, you may have seen a “high church” protestant group (looks like a Catholic Church) like Anglicans who generally can marry or date.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yeah an Anglican priest can be indistinguishable from a catholic one except for the fact that she and her wife have kids.

      • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        There’s also the part about being backward, hateful and wrong. I don’t even have to mention that one other thing but you know exactly what it is.

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    166
    ·
    2 days ago

    Hey hey now. Dont be bashful. You and your ilk has screamed that it does. In your eyes, you killed a person. You can’t switch when its uncomfortable for you.

    • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I would love to have the judge question them directly on the sanctity of human life and how it does not apply in this case but applies to abortion.

      Hell, if we can get a hold of the plaintiff and ask them to lose the case so that we can build case law off of the ruling, we might be able to get the Catholic church on record as saying abortion should be legalized.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        2 days ago

        No, they’ll just say it’s only valid if they do it, like an annulment vs. a divorce

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Annulment usually implies that the marriage was never consummated. Annulments exist outside of religion as well.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        Them losing doesn’t guarantee anything if it isn’t well argued. They need to try to win and put up the best defence. If they fail then there will be a solid case to take it further if they throw it, higher courts will look at it and the arguments and see that it doesn’t apply.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Could this case set a precedent if they win? Will that allow abortion to become legal?

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        No, Trump would immediately sign an executive order even though its supposed to be beyond his powers and anyone with a lick of status will bend over like they were just struck with the rod of God.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    119
    ·
    2 days ago

    Abortion is MURDER! UNLESS it Costs us MONEY in Which case Abortion is NOT MURDER!

    -People who Follow the 10 9 8 7 some Commandments!

  • saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    2 days ago

    Now, now, the Laws of Hammurabi clearly state what to do here…

    22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

    So you will note that punishment is only given out as the woman is harmed, as this is a life. Miscarriage shmishcarriage, it’s not a life yet so no harm done, no punishment given.

    It’s an open and shut case, Your Honour. The husband can demand all he wants but no life was harmed here, no eyes, no teeth, the $250,000 cap applies as “the court allows”.