Change is unlikely to occur without adequate … representation of faith communities in positions of influence – be they government bodies, research charities, or NHS trusts” Professor Sheikh says. He concludes that the long-term goal must be “to mainstream the understanding of the importance of religious identity.”
But Professor Aneez Esmail from Manchester University argues that whilst it is “reasonable [that] we try to plan and configure our services to take account of needs that may have their roots in particular beliefs … we cannot meet everyone’s demands for special services based on their religious identity: it would not be practical.” He goes on to argue that some faith groups might support practices which may be morally and ethically unacceptable to the majority – for example female circumcision and the refusal to accept blood transfusions in life saving situations.
Professor Esmail believes that going down the path of providing special services for defined groups risks stigmatisation and stereotyping. He concludes that “in an ideal world doctors…would ask about a patient’s beliefs not so that they can be categorised but because it might be important for the patient in their illness.
My now-retired-surgeon father spent several decades treating all sorts of folks at St. Josephs Hosptial in Tacoma. I say this to note that the Christian Church, Catholic and Protestant denominations alike, as well as the Jewish community, have a long history of providing care regardless of religious or social or financial background of the sick person. I have no doubt for instance that Christian healthcare this is tied directly to the healing ministry for which Christ was both lauded and vilified, and the example that was carried on through His disciples.
Regardless of faith, caring for the health of another is one of the most basic human interactions. I suggest that in faith-based hospitals today, caregivers set aside their religious affiliation and treat each patient as a child of God in need of help. Many also recognize a responsibility before God to do so. Most hospitals provide non-sectarian "chapels" so all people of faith have a quiet place to pray for their loved ones, and are consoled by "interfaith" chaplains.
I admit my ignorance of current Muslim medical services, but while I note that a thousand years ago the library of Alexandria was repleat with medical manuscripts by Galen and others, I have difficulty imagining Muslim health care merging wtih current faith-based medical services.
Do we have any reason for concern here, particularly now that our healthcare may become a hotter political issue in a Democrat-controlled Capitol Hill? With government promising health care to everybody (American and otherwise) in California, is there a possibility that Muslim-exclusive health care would cause a backlash against all faith-based health services?
Interested in your thoughts and experiences, especially those of you living in heavily-Muslim areas.