UCHealth denies kidney transplant to unvaccinated woman…

One of the effects of communism is to dehumanize people and to delegitimize the precious value we put on life.

This is due in part to the efforts of division as they have the same effect and for the same reason.

You will see more of this as time goes on.

This is one reason I am staunchly anti-abortion because you CANNOT devalue some life without devaluing all life. And as we chip away at the value of life, thinking it is with surgical precision in just the places we wish, in truth we are undermining THE most important value we have in the west as a whole.

So does this foolish policy mean that if someone dies, and they have a signed donor card, or are in a place where they have to opt out of having any/all healthy organs are automatically donated, that if they are non-jabbed, those organs which could save a live would be ignored/not used?

Yay, I am sure the policy makers considered the consequences of their mandates/policies…. NOT!

Up here in Canada, from what I can tell, each regional health board is looking at the whole “can a non-jabbed person get a transplant?”

And the answer is….. NO!

Alberta appeal court rejects unvaccinated woman’s request to get back on transplant list

A terminally ill woman’s bid to be re-added to a transplant list she was removed from for refusing a COVID-19 vaccine has been rejected by Alberta’s highest court.

Why was she removed from the transplant list?

Alberta transplant doctors have made getting the vaccine mandatory for eligibility, but Annette Lewis refuses to be immunized for COVID-19.

Oh for f’n sake.

In October, Lewis took her case to the Court of Appeal of Alberta. Her lawyer urged the appellate court to step in, arguing the vaccine requirement was causing Lewis’s death by removing the chance for a transplant and the possibility that it would save her life.

And what did the doctor’s say?

Lawyers for Alberta Health Services and the doctors argued that the decision had been made by a clinical team that must make determinations about who is most in need as well as who has the best prospect of survival…

And what stats did they use?

…citing the nearly 40 per cent death rate of transplant patients who contracted COVID-19 before the vaccines were available.

And what was the death rate BEFORE covid?  35%?  37%?

The appeal court upheld Belzil’s original finding, noting that medical decisions about scarce resources such as donor organs are difficult but must be made.

“In this case, the charter does not apply to the respondents’ exercise of clinical judgments in formulating pre-conditions to [organ] transplant, including requiring vaccination against COVID-19 in the wake of the pandemic,” the appeal judges found.

Deciding on scare resources?  Like we need resources going to the rich and famous, and too bad to the poor and regular people?  IS that where this is heading?

Lewis had asserted that by being denied a place on the transplant list, her rights to life, liberty and security were being violated as was her freedom of conscience.

And where we have universal health-care, what other reasons did the courts give to rejecting this?

The court denied all of those grounds, noting in its rejection of the right to life argument that while patients have the right to make decisions such as declining a vaccine, but that decision can result in serious risks or consequences.

So rejecting a vaccine on religious grounds is cause to deny a life saving transplant?

Oh look!  You have an opinion we (hospital/doctors) disagree with, so will be deny you health care, too? ! ?

Lewis also argued that she was being discriminated against, and urged the court to find that “medical status” should be protected.

The court declined to do so, finding that what Lewis was actually arguing for was a finding of discrimination on the basis of a COVID-19 vaccination status.

But that is exactly what it is.  DISCRIMINATION!

“… Her choice not to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is just that — a choice.”

A choice the courts have found is a reason to discriminate against her for a potential life saving transplant.

Oh, you decided to support liberal agendas, we will place you ahead of those who question the agenda.

OH, you decided to support the family unit/are religious, you are now at the back of the line.

And remember, it was just a choice you made.  We are NOT discriminating against you if you would only follow the NPC programming.

If you do not follow the agenda/narrative, your choice will affect your live, your career, etc.

That is what this court is saying.