A Doctor's Oath

1. 86

   lovemychrisposted 13 years ago

   "We already know how vulnerable patients can be; we invisibly protect them on a daily basis from all kinds of dangers inside and outside of the hospital. Their safety is our responsibility, and we practically kill ourselves to ensure it at all costs. But it’s also our responsibility to guard the practice of medicine from people who would hijack our tools of healing for their own political or monetary gain.
   
   In recent years, we have been abject failures in this responsibility, and untold numbers of people have gleefully taken advantage of that. Silently allowing a politician to manipulate our medical decision-making for the purposes of an ideological goal erodes any tiny scrap of trust we might have left.
   
   It comes down to this: When the community has failed a patient by voting an ideologue into office…When the ideologue has failed the patient by writing legislation in his own interest instead of in the patient’s…When the legislative system has failed the patient by allowing the legislation to be considered… When the government has failed the patient by allowing something like this to be signed into law… We as physicians cannot and must not fail our patients by ducking our heads and meekly doing as we’re told.
   
   Because we are their last line of defense."
   
   He's talking about rape.
   http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/03/20/g … trasounds/
   
   I say we post the names of legislators who support this procedure on-line.
   Use their tactics on them.
   But--I wouldn't go so far as to suggest harming them, as Operation Rescue does.
   Just get them out of office.
   And for god's sakes, don't elect one of them president!

   replyreport
   1. 72

      aguasilverposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      On the blog the doctor states:
      
      "It is our responsibility, as always, to protect our patients from things that would harm them. Therefore, as physicians, it is our duty to refuse to perform a medical procedure that is not medically indicated. Any medical procedure. Whatever the pseudo-justification."
      
      Wonder how he votes on abortion then, when it is not 'medically indicated'?
      
      Just a thought.

      replyreport
      1. 86

         lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         There's a difference though...
         
         Abortion is a medical decision a woman makes on her personal life, which the doctor carries out--like a vasectomy or circumcision.
         I mean--what is the medical indication for either of those?
         We are entitled to control our personal lives. That is hardly a psueudo justification.
         
         However, an interior ultra-sound/rape is not necessary, and in fact has no medical reason whatsoever.
         
         And, neither the patient nor the doctor has requested it-- a politician has.
         This is nothing more than Gvt intrusion into a womans life, and gvt intrusion into the doctor/patient relationship.

         replyreport
         1. 74

            stclairjackposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            i'm pro life and  a republican (albeit a very VERY frustrated one),.... and i believe you are 100% right,.... this is bull,...
            
            its laughable to see right wing kool-aid kids screaming about getting the government out of our lives,.....
            
            when they cant seem to get out of our vaginas

            replyreport
            1. 86

               lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Yes....I really really wonder what is at the bottom of it?

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Eric Newlandposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  The most militant pro-lifers are frustrated that they haven't been able to overturn Roe v. Wade directly so they're starting this passive-aggressive BS. There's really not much else to read into.
                  
                  While I'm pro-life too, I recognize counter-productive policies when I see them, and this one is a doozy. Any attempt to reduce abortions that isn't grounded in compassion will never work, and certain parties (pun slightly intended) need to realize that.

                  replyreport
         2. 72

            aguasilverposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Agreed LMC, though I will stand by what the doc said on vasectomy or circumcision, I was circumcised aged 11 years old on medical grounds, hurt like fury, but should a doctor conduct surgery for non medically indicated reasons?
            
            This doctor seems to think not.
            
            Having said that I agree this nonsense is a political quasi religious ploy designed to reduce abortion.
            
            To a degree; as a pro lifer, I agree that before abortion is promoted and grasped upon as a solution, women should be counselled on both sides of the issue, for many women I have met have regretted that abortion they leapt at in their initial confusion.
            
            In the end result, abortion, like suicide, is something no society can effectively legislate against.
            
            This vaginal intrusion does not count as medically indicated IMO, as a normal non intrusive external ultra scan would suffice to see what level of development the baby was at before they killed it.
            
            Of course the REAL ploy being used is the fact that pro life know that when mother sees her child on ultra scan, it makes it more difficult for her to order it's death, and both sides are playing on this fact, pro life to reduce abortions, pro choice to stop mothers having that decision to take once they have seen their child.
            
            Anyone who has see their child in ultrasound, knows there is a small human in the mothers womb, which is why women who want the child carry the ultrasound around like a family portrait.
            
            And why pro choice wants to stop the mother seeing what she is seeking to destroy.

            replyreport
2. 51

   JesseNguyenposted 13 years ago

   I believe so, but as everything else, that can be twisted to serve ones own agenda. Just look at the world view of it - a damn shame.
   
   Press Release Distribution

   replyreport