As election day approaches, the implications of a Harris-Walz victory this November are already sparking concerns about the future of the US healthcare system. At stake is the ability of medical professionals committed to the “do no harm” principle to object to participating in medical interventions that they believe cause harm. The reality is that such a scenario would be a disaster, forcing healthcare institutions to prioritize ideology over patient well-being.
While some prominent medical associations have enthusiastically endorsed the medicalization of gender ideology, a growing number of healthcare workers are speaking out against the dangers of sex-change procedures, particularly when performed on minors. These whistleblowers often pay a heavy price for their courage, facing intimidation, retaliation, and even termination.
Take, for example, the case of Dr. Ethan Haim, a surgeon who was indicted by the Department of Justice for allegedly obtaining patient records without authorization. Haim had provided conservative journalist Christopher Rufo with documents suggesting that Texas Children’s Hospital had continued to perform sex-change procedures on minors despite earlier claims to the contrary. Similarly, Vanessa Sivadge, a former nurse at the same hospital, was fired after she shared her concerns about the hospital’s use of Medicaid funds to cover sex-change procedures for children.
Valerie Kloosterman, a physician assistant in Michigan, also faced severe consequences for her refusal to use transgender pronouns or refer patients for “gender reassignment” procedures. After requesting a religious accommodation, she was summoned to a meeting with hospital administrators who mocked her faith and accused her of contributing to gender dysphoria-related suicides. She ended up suing the hospital.
Despite the existence of federal laws protecting medical conscience rights, enforcement is woefully inadequate. Many advocates for conscience rights lack private enforcement powers, relying instead on the federal government to uphold these protections. However, when the administration is hostile to conscience rights, as is the case with the Biden administration, these protections are often ignored or undermined.
The Biden administration has taken several steps to undermine conscience rights, including dismantling the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division of the Department of Health and Human Services and stripping the office of its authority to enforce conscience and religious freedom protections. The Department of Justice has also targeted whistleblowers like Dr. Haim, further chilling the ability of healthcare workers to speak out against abuses.
The administration’s actions are particularly concerning in light of its efforts to reintroduce a “transgender mandate,” which would force medical providers to perform transgender procedures, require insurance companies to cover them, and demand that doctors use preferred pronouns. Doctors who refuse to comply could be excluded from federally funded healthcare programs.
In response to the administration’s actions, groups like Alliance Defending Freedom are urging states to enact laws protecting medical conscience rights. Seven states have already enacted their own medical conscience rights laws, known as “MED Acts.” Meanwhile, organizations like Do No Harm are pushing back against the promotion of gender ideology in medicine, highlighting the need for a more nuanced approach to healthcare.
Ultimately, the outcome of the elections will have significant implications for the future of the US healthcare system. A Harris-Walz victory would likely cement the dominance of gender ideology in medicine, forcing healthcare institutions to prioritize ideology over patient well-being. Regardless of the outcome, however, it is clear that more robust enforcement of conscience rights is needed to protect the integrity of the healthcare system and the rights of healthcare workers.
