Re: Wisconsin Assembly Bill 67
Testimony before Wisconsin Senate Committee
on Health, Children, Families, Aging and Long-Term Care
October 7, 2003
As the current nursing shortage continues to grow and with no end in sight, it would be unwise to drive out any nurse who would feel forced to give up his or her profession rather than to compromise conscience on any one of these issues.
I am Marianne Linane, Executive Director of the
National Association of Pro-life Nurses and a
resident of Milwaukee, WI. I am here to testify in
favor of Assembly Bill 67, legislation which would
ensure that health care professionals can refuse to
participate in work-related activities which are
objectionable to them on religious or moral grounds
without fear of reprisal, including loss of
employment or denial of promotion for which one is
otherwise qualified and entitled.
Our organization, founded to unite and support
pro-life nurses, is now 23 years old.
From our very beginning it became apparent that
our greatest need was to assist those nurses who
were being asked to participate in activities which
transgress our moral sensitivities. At the time,
this concern was only in the context of abortion. We
have since provided nurses with information about
existing laws which would protect their right to
refuse such participation, established a data base
of attorneys and legal organizations who would help
defend those rights, and established a legal fund to
help with a portion of the financial assistance
needed to initiate legal defense if necessary. The
most valuable of our offerings has been the moral
support of knowing that there are other nurses of
the same ethical values and to encourage nurses to
resist the pressure to participate in abortion
activities.
As abortion becomes increasingly unfavorable as
an acceptable practice of good medicine and is now
largely performed in free-standing clinics staffed
by those who favor its practice, and as laws
protecting those who would refuse to participate in
such activities are passed, we see less need of such
support in the abortion context.
However, there are many other practices now
invading the medical profession which are equally
offensive to many of us in the profession because of
our moral and religious conviction that life begins
at conception and is to be respected until natural
death. These offensive practices are not restricted
to one area or one type of nursing. They pervade
every aspect of the profession we are trained to
practice. The list of ethical dilemmas continues to
grow: in vitro fertilization with its creation of
multiple human embryos, treatments utilizing fetal
tissue obtained from aborted babies, embryonic and
fetal experimentation, certain sterilization
practices, looming rationing of medical resources,
assisted suicide and euthanasia, and probably,
eventually, cloning.
Probably the most rapidly growing practices which
are in antithesis of our nurturing profession are
the practices of terminal sedation where the goal of
the administration of sedatives seeks to end the
life of the patient and not to relieve distress, and
the practice of withdrawal of nutrition and
hydration from non-terminal patients. Certainly the
practice of withdrawal of nutrition from
non-terminal patients has already had its share of
legal challenges and, like abortion, continues to be
controversial and objectionable to many of us who
will be asked to participate in this practice. Most
health care professionals adhere to the belief that
our mission is to treat and heal patients the best
of our ability, not to engage in actions that
deliberately destroy human life, thereby creating an
atmosphere in which human life is no longer
respected.
The organization recognized as the official
spokesperson of American nurses, the American Nurses
Association, has recognized the importance of the
right of a nurse not to participate in morally
unconscionable acts. I quote from their Code of
Ethics: "Threats to (a nurse's) integrity may also
include an expectation that the nurse will act in a
way that is inconsistent with the values or ethics
of the profession....Nurses have a duty to remain
consistent with both their personal and professional
values and to accept compromise only to the degree
that it remains an integrity-preserving compromise."
The areas of concern to nurses appear to be very
well addressed in the six protections being proposed
in AB 67. These provisions would protect pro-life
nurses from being forced to choose between our moral
sensitivities and our livelihood. Nursing has always
been and, because of its service nature, will always
be, comprised primarily of individuals of altruistic
motivation who will rise to the defense of the
vulnerable and defenseless. As recent polling of
nurses by a prominent nursing journal reveals, they
are overwhelmingly pro-life and would, indeed, find
themselves in compromising situations if these
protections are not implemented.
As the current nursing shortage continues to grow
and with no end in sight, it would be unwise to
drive out any nurse who would feel forced to give up
his or her profession rather than to compromise
conscience on any one of these issues. They must
know that they will be protected from having to
participate in these objectionable practices.
For all the pro-life nurses of Wisconsin, the
National Association of Pro-life Nurses urges you to
pass this legislation for protection of our moral
and religious beliefs. Thank you.