How Health Care Refusals are Handled in the Public Dialogue: The Results of A Media Audit

In 2006, the Public Interest Media Group (PIMG) reviewed a focused, representative sample of media coverage to assess how the issues surrounding health care refusals are being framed and the key messages – and messengers – that are most prominent surrounding the issue Over 200 stories from national media outlets, regional media outlets where debates ensued, industry publications, and key advocacy organizations were reviewed to answer the following questions: (1) What are the core issues surrounding the refusal of reproductive health care?; (2) What are the major themes in coverage?; (3) What are the opponents and proponents of refusing reproductive health care saying?; and (4) Who are the messengers?. This paper presents the results of this audit

The overall news media coverage surrounding the refusal of care was found to be relatively balanced. Six pairs of competing messages were present in the media coverage: (1) Access to Health Care vs. Violates Religious/Moral Beliefs, (2) Imposing Religious Beliefs vs. Religious Freedom, (3) Patients' Rights vs. Rights of Health Care Workers, (4), Protecting Patient Health vs. Protecting Health Care Workers Jobs/Discrimination, (5) Violates Medical Ethics vs. Violating Conscience, and (6) Politics vs. “Baby Killing.” Each side has health care providers and health care organizations as their main messengers, as well as policymakers. One striking difference was the use of patients as messengers in opposition to health care refusals.