Page 42 of 84 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast
Results 411 to 420 of 832

Thread: Michigan lesbian couple says pediatrician denied baby care due to sexual orientation

  1. #411
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    It makes sense. The physician said she likely couldn't develop a proper patient physician relationship due to the parents living in sin. If it was me I would have still treated the child, but if there are other options and the physician felt they couldn't provide the best care because their lifestyle was a barrier in developing a proper patient/physician relationship then that should be respected. It's not as if she didn't arrange for other care.
    After she had agreed to take the child as a patient, knowing that the parents were lesbians before hand. And she couldn't have known that there would be alternatives available that would be willing or able to take on the additional patients. It begs the question, what would she have done if her fellow doctor couldn't have seen the baby that day? Would she have saw the baby or cancelled the appointment?
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  2. #412
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    After she had agreed to take the child as a patient, knowing that the parents were lesbians before hand. And she couldn't have known that there would be alternatives available that would be willing or able to take on the additional patients. It begs the question, what would she have done if her fellow doctor couldn't have seen the baby that day? Would she have saw the baby or cancelled the appointment?
    So, pretty much all strawmen and hypotheticals. Oh lord, the sky is falling!

  3. #413
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Wow, you're really not reading today. The difference is one is protected by constitution and law and the other isn't.

    And let's be clear, there was no refusal of service in any event. The GROUP provides the service, it's one of the wonderful things about setting up a medical group. If you're sick that day, or otherwise occupied, another physician from the group sees your patients.
    Please provide the exact part of the Constitution which protects people from being discriminated against by businesses based on their race or religion. Exact wording there.

    There was a refusal of service because she had agreed to take their child as a patient, not her colleague. We don't know what she would have done had her colleague not been able to take on another patient, but likely would have canceled at least future appointments if not that appointment.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  4. #414
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    No, none of those things were a possibility in this situation. She had her partner see the child, on the same day she was supposed to see the child. You are making up possibilities out of thin air. That's disingenuous.
    Yes they were possibilities because there is always the possibility that the other doctors in a practice are booked up, have too many patients. Just because it didn't happen in this case, doesn't mean the possibility didn't exist.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  5. #415
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,983

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    After she had agreed to take the child as a patient, knowing that the parents were lesbians before hand. And she couldn't have known that there would be alternatives available that would be willing or able to take on the additional patients. It begs the question, what would she have done if her fellow doctor couldn't have seen the baby that day? Would she have saw the baby or cancelled the appointment?
    Who knows, but why should they be entitled to her services simply because they are lesbians? If a physician believes they can't provide the highest quality of care to someone due to certain factors then the responsible thing is to have them seen by someone else. It's not much different from practitioners referring someone elsewhere for abortion services or those who are unwilling to see drug addicts or other patient populations they may not be able to establish a proper relationship with.

    This issue is being blown up way out of proportion, likely due to this special rights movement of LGBTQ entitlement with blatant disrespect of the rights and beliefs of others who may have issues with it.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  6. #416
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,146

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Yes they were possibilities because there is always the possibility that the other doctors in a practice are booked up, have too many patients. Just because it didn't happen in this case, doesn't mean the possibility didn't exist.
    It didn't happen in this case because the possibility didn't exist. Did you not read any of the links?
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  7. #417
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    According to the SCOTUS they are indeed. Look up protected classes. And every state has PA laws, most of them are enshrined in the state's constitution.
    Many of those states have PA laws that also protect based on sexuality.

    The SCOTUS has said the ERA is constitutional, not that those are constitutionally protected rights. There is a difference. The ERA could be easily repealed by a simple vote of Congress and Presidential approval, and its done. No more protection of people from discrimination by businesses/individuals based on things like religion or race. While those things could be still protected from unequal treatment under the law, they would not be protected from private individuals discriminating against them based on those traits.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  8. #418
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Please provide the exact part of the Constitution which protects people from being discriminated against by businesses based on their race or religion. Exact wording there.

    There was a refusal of service because she had agreed to take their child as a patient, not her colleague. We don't know what she would have done had her colleague not been able to take on another patient, but likely would have canceled at least future appointments if not that appointment.
    First, google protected classes and do your own damn homework. Second, you so obviously don't know or understand how medical groups work. The parents are signed on as patients of the GROUP. They may be seen/assigned to a particular doctor in the group, but if that doctor is unavailable FOR ANY REASON, they are seen by another from the group.

    Look, it's blindingly clear you are just pissed because this one doctor didn't approve of the gay parents and she should be horsewhipped at high noon for the gross violation of having a religion that doesn't comport with your beliefs.

  9. #419
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    It didn't happen in this case because the possibility didn't exist. Did you not read any of the links?
    Do you understand what possibility means? Yes, it was possible that the child might not have been seen that day due to her refusal to see the child based on the sexual orientation of the parents. We don't know what she would have done had her colleague refused to see the baby, whether due to already being booked or agreeing with the first doctor. There is nothing in the story that says that the doctor would have seen the child had the other doctor refused. But along with this, the doctor had already agreed to take the baby as a new patient of hers (prenatal), and even if she had seen the child this time, the possibility does exist that had she simply told them that that was the only appointment she could see them, she couldn't possibly know that the couple could then find someone else to see them, again whether due to other doctors having too may patients or due to their own religious objections.

    Possibility is different than probability.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  10. #420
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,770

    Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    It makes sense. The physician said she likely couldn't develop a proper patient physician relationship due to the parents living in sin. If it was me I would have still treated the child, but if there are other options and the physician felt they couldn't provide the best care because their lifestyle was a barrier in developing a proper patient/physician relationship then that should be respected. It's not as if she didn't arrange for other care.
    I somewhat agree with you, but mainly it's because you've outlined the conditions.

    1) If there are other (presumably equivalent) options,
    2) Physician felt she couldn't provide the best care, and
    3) Physician arranged an alternative

    That's a workable principle.

    And I'm not really addressing you, but the hypotheticals are just an attempt to come to some understanding of a principle to guide care by medical professionals. The question some of us are asking is does the provider's ethical or moral obligation change if one or more of those conditions are NOT met? Or are partially or inadequately met? Say the only other physician is 25 miles away, has a bad record, and/or is outside the couple's network?

    It's ultimately why separate but equal wasn't a good solution - stuff just like that - and why some of us aren't willing to buy into that argument.

Page 42 of 84 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •