BURLINGTON — The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has accused the University of Vermont Medical Center of forcing a nurse to assist in an abortion procedure despite the nurse’s religious objections.
HHS announced Wednesday that it had determined the hospital had violated the Church Amendments, which prohibit recipients of federal funds from discriminating against health care providers who refuse to participate in certain procedures based on moral or religious objections.
The letter from Roger Severino, the director of HHS’ Office for Civil Rights, asks the hospital to adjust its policies or face losing the federal funding it receives from HHS. The Office of Civil Rights also accused the hospital of not cooperating in its investigation, which stemmed from the nurse’s complaint filed in May 2018.
The HHS investigation found that the hospital “intentionally, unnecessarily and knowingly” scheduled nurses who had moral or religious objection to abortion to assist in abortion procedures and that the hospital discriminates against health care personnel who object to abortion.
“UVMMC has forced and attempted to force health care personnel (including nurses) into assisting with abortion over their conscience-based objections,” Severino wrote.
Annie Mackin, a spokesperson for UVMMC, said in a statement that the hospital does not discriminate against employees who opt out of procedures to which they object.
“The University of Vermont Medical Center has robust, formal protections that safeguard both our employees’ religious, ethical and cultural beliefs, and our patients’ rights to access safe and legal abortion,” she said.
The Atlantic broke the news of the complaint Wednesday morning.
The hospital repeatedly assigned nurses to participate in abortion proceedings without advance notice of the procedure, and scheduled objecting employees to assist in abortions while other, non-objecting employees were available, the HHS human rights office charges.
“Although UVMMC could have readily, and without interruption to patient services, accomodated the religious or moral objections to elective abortion of its health care personnel, it nevertheless intentionally and unnecessarily assigned objecting personnel to such procedures,” Severino wrote.
The nurse involved in the case, a Catholic, told investigators that she had been led to believe a procedure she was scheduled for was not an elective abortion, and objected when she discovered that it was. However, the nurse said she was coerced into participating in the abortion and feared she would be fired or reported to licensing authorities if she objected, Severino wrote.
The hospital investigated and did not substantiate the claims made by the nurse, who no longer works at the hospital, Mackin said.
“When the UVM Medical Center first learned of the allegations that are the subject of OCR’s letter, we promptly and thoroughly investigated them and determined that they were not supported by the facts,” she said.
Francis Manion, a lawyer for the conservative American Center for Law & Justice, represented the nurse and filed the initial complaint on her behalf. The American Center for Law & Justice’s chief counsel is Jay Sekulow, who is part of President Donald Trump’s legal team advising him in connection with investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
“She suffered immediate emotional distress, attempted to suppress the event psychologically, and has been haunted by nightmares ever since,” Manion wrote. “In addition, her employer has created a hostile environment targeting [redacted] and other employees who conscientiously object to participating in abortion procedures.”
The American Center for Law & Justice said it had been in contact with at least four other nurses at the UVMMC who objected and said they had been involved in similar situations.
UVM has received federal funding from an HHS program for HIV/AIDS care since 1998, and the hospital spent $1.6 million in federal assistance in the last three-year project period ending in April 2018, according to the letter.
The hospital began offering elective abortion in September 2017, and in February 2018 adjusted its Conflict of Care policy. Under the policy, employees can request to be excused from procedures that conflict with the employees “cultural values, ethics, or religious beliefs,” including abortion, HHS charges.
But the policy requires objecting employees to provide care “in any scenario where circumstances prevent arrangents for alternative care” to “ensure that patient care is not negatively impacted.” The hospital can discipline employees who refuse, according to the letter, which the HHS ruled violated the Church Amendments.
“Such circumstances of conflict are only possible because UVMMC chooses to provide abortion services while not adopting staffing plans and rotations that would fully respect the known requests of its professionals to not participate in abortions,” Severino wrote.
The letter requests the hospital notify the HHS civil rights office within 30 days on whether the hospital intends to work to change its policies on the topic and take immediate action to “remedy the effect of its past discriminatory conduct.”
If the hospital does not provide HHS “sufficient assurance” it will do so, the civil rights office will pass the violation notice and evidence behind it to the component of HHS that provides the hospital funding for consideration.
Mackin said that the hospital has engaged with the Office of Civil Rights over the past nine months and has sought to receive advice on how the hospital’s policies and practices could be improved as recently as this month.
“We nonetheless remain willing to work cooperatively with OCR to identify any ways in which we can further support our employees’ conscience and religious rights, in a manner that is consistent with high-quality patient care, and the other legal and ethical obligations we have to our patients,” she said.
Under the Trump administration, the HHS formed a new office specifically devoted to religious freedom and conscience objections in January 2018 and announced a new rule in May meant to further protect individuals who object to providing care for religious or moral reasons.
The new rule “was the latest signal that this administration is prioritizing issues that matter to religious conservatives, often at the cost of expanded rights for other groups,” including LGBTQ Americans and women seeking access to abortion and birth control, The Atlantic reported.
Severino said in a press release that the investigation found “serious discrimination” by the medical center.
“Forcing medical staff to assist in the taking of human life inflicts a moral injury on them that is not only unnecessary and wrong, it violates longstanding federal law,” Severino said. “We stand ready to assist UVMMC in changing its policies and procedures to respect conscience rights and remedy the effects of its discrimination.”
