Mailbag: Two opposing views on abortion ban

Hoag made the right call

Re. “Mailbag: Abortion ban at our hospital is ‘unconscionable’ May 31: I disagree with both of the ladies who took the time to express their displeasure over Hoag Hospital’s recent decision to no longer perform elective abortions.

They certainly have a right to their opinion. However, isn’t it also the right of any hospital or group to make the decision to not perform abortions based on beliefs or convictions?

Hoag is a fine hospital. I’ve been a patient there for a emergency appendectomy that almost took my life. I’m grateful for the staff there.

I have other friends and family who have come back to health as a result of Hoag. In this case, I applaud Hoag for taking what I believe is a correct moral stance.

Isn’t the Hippocratic Oath primarily about preserving life, which is what Hoag does?

Even if abortion is legal, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s morally right. Just as the two ladies have a right to their convictions, what about faith-based convictions that differ? Don’t people and organizations have a right to disagree?

There are many other resources for abortions, such as Planned Parenthood. Really, where are all of these abortions taking place in Orange County today? In Planned Parenthood offices with the help of those who support abortion rights.

We all respect the right of women to do what they want with their own bodies, so please respect the opposing view that an abortion is taking a potential human’s life.

Rick Rainey

Costa Mesa

The Hoag Hospital Board announcement that its decision to ban elective abortions was an independent one is laughable.

Whether it was done at the direction of its new masters or in anticipation of receiving them misses the point.

What we women living in Hoag’s catchment area should be worrying about is where do we go from here? Given Hoag’s penchant for pleasing its new owners by adhering to its reproductive rules, how far will Hoag try to reach into our bedrooms in order to control our constitutionally protected reproductive rights?

Will they (independently of course!) ban practitioners and staff from prescribing certain kinds of contraceptives? Ban contraceptives altogether?

After spending so many years and millions of dollars building its reputation as a caring and competent healthcare institution for women, Hoag has in one fell swoop destroyed it for many women in its catchment area.

If, in fact, its decision to take this step was independent, then Hoag can revoke it. If it was not, it can go back to its new owners and stand its ground, establishing a precedent that Hoag makes its own decisions on reproductive rights issues consistent with U.S law.

In the meantime, I intend to take my healthcare business elsewhere.

Jill B. Deal

Newport Beach