Covering up the options

Monday, Jan. 12, 2009 | 2:07 a.m.

Here is a hypothetical situation that would be acceptable under a Bush administration “right of conscience” rule that will take effect Jan. 19:

A woman starting a heterosexual relationship says to her doctor that she is mulling whether to become a mother. He advises her on birth control options and says that if she does become pregnant she should undergo an abortion.

He does not offer any other advice, and that is his right under the federal rule. This is because his own outlook is that human overpopulation is the cause of wars, disease outbreaks, famine, poverty and a host of other ills.

This is not, of course, the scenario envisioned by the Bush administration, which announced the rule Dec. 19 and ordered that it become effective one day before Barack Obama’s inauguration.

But it could happen under the rule, much to the outrage of the anti-abortion groups that pushed hard for its passage.

Under the rule, which is a sweeping expansion of a decades-old rule stating that doctors cannot be coerced into performing abortions, health care workers are within their rights to share with patients only information that conforms to their beliefs.

As the Bush administration envisioned the rule, doctors and nurses who are opposed to abortions, birth control, emergency contraception, in vitro fertilization and other procedures could withhold information about those options from their patients, and not have to worry about being sued for malpractice.

The rule was announced by Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt, who said, “This rule protects the right of medical providers to care for their patients in accord with their conscience.”

Our view is that patients seeking advice from their doctors have a right to hear all options, regardless of the doctor’s beliefs.

Obama and many members of Congress have spoken against the rule. We hope they quickly cooperate on overturning this unhealthy parting shot from President George W. Bush.