The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a final regulation Thursday to clarify the rights of health care providers who object to performing certain procedures as a matter of conscience. The regulation propels a debate between the balance of the personal views of health care providers and a patient’s right to health care access.

Opponents of the regulation, including some members of Congress, the American Hospital Association (AHA), the ACLU, women’s health groups and abortion rights groups, said they would look into all options to repeal the regulation. The American Medical Association is reviewing the final regulation and did not have a comment, but a previous letter from the organization urged HHS to withdraw the draft version of the rule.

The final regulation affirms the right of federally funded health care providers to decline participation in services they object to, such as abortion, HHS said.

HHS officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a statement HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt said, “Doctors and other health care providers should not be forced to choose between good professional standing and violating their conscience.”

The regulation also confirms current non-discrimination protections to all providers in HHS-funded programs. Recipients of HHS funds will have to certify their compliance with laws protecting conscience rights by Oct. 1, 2009, or risk losing funding.

The final regulation will “create chaos among providers across the country,” said Planned Parenthood for America President Cecile Richards. “We’re shocked” that the administration chose to issue the regulation and limit access to care and information, she added.

Richards and the ACLU both referred to the regulation as a “parting shot” from the administration at women’s access to health care.

“This rule does not achieve the important balance between caring for patients and protecting employees’ beliefs,” said AHA Executive Vice President Rick Pollack, adding the regulation could adversely impact federal health funding and patient access.

HHS emphasized that the final regulation will not restrict providers from performing legal services, including abortion. However, many opponents argued the regulation language is too vague, and may affect birth control, emergency contraception and other services.

“These regulations leave the term ‘abortion’ undefined, so individuals and institutions are free to classify birth control as abortion and restrict related information and services,” said National Partnership for Women and Families President Debra L. Ness.

Discussing a draft version of the regulation in August, Leavitt said it would not cover contraception. But opponents are not convinced (See related story, CQ HealthBeat, Aug. 21, 2008).

“The Bush administration has now opened the door to allow individuals, based on their own personal biases, to deny patients access to information and health care information,” said Richards.

The regulation would cost more than $44 million each year to enforce and would require 584,294 federally funded medical entities and their staff to certify compliance or face disciplinary and/or punitive penalties, according to earlier statements from HHS.