h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<> (Bouncy)


<> (Della)

But as you can see, Della, that's *not* what Bouncy said. If expressing his views conflicts with his professional duties (if expressing/acting on his views interferes with the rights of his patients) then he has to choose between them. He has that freedom.

<>

But what if she didn't have the savvy to realise that her doctor was lying?

Noggin

Oh, I had no intention of pushing your buttons, azahar... I had forgotten how sensitive you are about that subject.

I apologise if you are bitterly offended, but people do have a choice of doctors, it is not as if you're in Sierra Leone with one medic provided by an aid agency for hundreds of people!

Charming as ever, Della ... don't worry, I'm way beyond you ever personally offending me again. I'll just sit back and watch you make a total @ss of yourself instead, okay? Have fun!

az

Hmm Della have you noticed the assumptions you are loading into your arguments that make your points shaky at best and at worst invalid.

You assume that all of the previously mentioned doctor's patients are completely free to change theri physician. Well what if a 15 year old wanted to get free condoms or the pill for instance. What if a wife wanted to get contraceptives without her husband knowing. Changing doctor under these circumstances would certainly make parents or spouses suspicious if not aware and in this sense would be breaching patient confidentiallity.

He was trying to make a moral point to the community something someone in his position reallyu should not be doing. It would be alright if he told patieents on a one to one case-by-case basis that prescribing contraception was contrary to his moral wishes, but that's not what he chose to do.

Re Della's post 293:
<< Re Six7's, assertions. My sister lives in Nelson. Low SES, give me a break! In Nelson?

Who there doesn't have a car, an SUV even? erm >>

I presume she doesn't tell you the truth... maybe you just don't listen... maybe she lives in Blinkeredville...

I reiterate: the nearest school (Victory Primary School) to Hassan's practice has the lowest decile rating in the province

Now this might shatter your rose-tinted spectacles... but that decile rating is TWO (i.e. it is in the LOWEST 20% of all schools NATIONALLY)

----------------------------
http://www.minedu.govt.nz/web/downloadable/dl5958_v1/2006-webversion-apr-chapter1.doc
The decile rating is the indicator used to measure the extent to which schools draw from low socio-economic communities.
...
The indicator is based on Census data for households with school-aged children in each school’s catchment area. Decile ratings are recalculated following each census, which occurs every 5 years.
----------------------------

For many families in the area surrounding Hassan's practice, this already sorry decile rating is actually *inflated* by the new, ticky-tacky houses in Bishopdale - where SUVs, boats, jetskis and the like are all safely tucked away in alarmed 3-car garages...

Of course, their kids go - by SUV or similar - to nearby Enner Glynn Primary (decile rating: 8) or Hampden Street Primary (decile rating: 7)

http://www.tki.org.nz/e/schools/graphical_search.php?gs_region=Nelson_City

The sad reality is that Hassan's catchment includes one of Nelson's largest areas of 'state housing' , which - despite noble intentions - is on a par with council flats in the UK in terms of socio-economic related problems

Many of his patients do not have access to a car - at least not one that is registered and/or warranted (like 'taxed and MOTd')

His conscious, value-driven decision to ostracise his patients risks compounding many more problems than simply denying them primary health care

O to have the luxury of choice!

Hey sixes7s I find ironically flirting with Della works quite well!

On a more serious note I think if any doctor has certain strong moral/religious views that will possibly affect their ability to make a good objective decision for the best interests of their patient, as is commonly accepted by the majority of the profession, they should be in a different job. The medical profession should start facing up to this issue, especially in the current climate of religious fundementalism. I know the Catholics are a pain in the arse, but the way things are going the evangelicals are going to become even more of a problem.

Flirting, Fanny? But you're a woman, surely!

<>

Wou,d you apply this to medical professionals such as the nursing lecturer currently teaching my son, who is a gay activist? Don't her strong views on one dimension make her just as likely to be blinkered?

If you say 'no' to that, then surely you're being inconsistent...

99.9% of doctors (including a local lesbian activist) find that no such issues arise. Once you start saying that health professionals with strong beliefs are unacceptable, you may well find a huge mess, and in some cases, the biter bit!

<< Don't her strong views on one dimension make her just as likely to be blinkered? >>

Sufficient exercise of the intellect (a prerequisite for 'gay activism') is highly likely to preclude "one dimensional thinking", which is rightly associated with bigots, zealots, fanatics and other ignoramuses who subscribe to prejudicial views

Besides which to make the nursing educator analogous to the Nelson doctor, she would have to do something like refuse to teach the sexual health part of the curricullum to students who didn't support her politics.

It's one thing to have strong personal views. It's another completely to think that one's views should affect other people directly eg compromising their health or education.

<< It's one thing to have strong personal views... >>

Indeed! That's sorta what I meant by 'sufficient' exercise...

Interminable stamina is rarely balanced by strength... or control

<>


Oh six7s, that's prejudice in and of itself! Or, at the very least, it's having a bias one particular way, implying that gay activists are as you'd no doubt say "smarter" than the rest of us!

Don't put words in my mouth Della, they taste vile

It was not an example of PREjudice, it was a statement based on an observation that gay activists seem to be well above average; in terms of intelligence, wisdom, empathy, compassion , common sense, etc

But then, that's not exactly surprising when I consider how the average is pulled so low by idiots

<< "smarter" than the rest of us >>

If that was the case, I would not have subscribed to this thread

Smarter than some of us... yeah, obviously

Della, cutie, I said >> affect their ability to make a good objective decision for the best interests of their patient, as is commonly accepted by the majority of the profession<<

So what I'm NOT saying is that all Christians or religious believers etc should not be doctors.

But eg refusing to perform an abortion, for any other reason than on legal or medical grounds, IS affecting their ability. But I'm sure there are plenty of good health workers who have religious beliefs who can put their own views aside when working professionally.

>>
Smarter than some of us... yeah, obviously
<<

"Sufficient exercise of the intellect (a prerequisite for 'gay activism') ..."

Um. Have you come across a character called Rillington?

He starts off sensibly enough, becomes increasingly irrational, and then seems to calm down. But he was later seen to be still at it elsewhere. As far as I can tell (and I haven't been stalking him that much) he has opinions on only one topic.

F63189?thread=2548501

TRiG.

We still seem to have some big problems with basic terms here.

Im pro-black, but that does not mean that Im in any way anti-white.

Likewise Im pro-gay, yet I happen to heterosexual and believe me being pro-gay does not stop me spending as much time as possible promoting heterosexual activity as I possibly can

In the same vain pro choice does not mean anti-life it makes me and others very much in favour of promoting the quality of lives for those who choose birth control and their immediate families.

However much you try to cloud the issue Della those who are concioulsy pro-anything you dont like are not automatically anti the things you do like.

one love

Rillington is a gay activist? Seemed to me that he mostly had a huge chip on his shoulder.

Well, I'm not pro-gay, pro-black, pro-abortion ... what the hell does that mean anyhow? Pro? You want to promote more people becoming gay, black, having abortions? What? Silly term, imo.

The term pro-choice for women looking for this option is the correct one. They are not in any way promoting abortion, they are dealing with their own personal situation as best they can, and having a *choice* is what they need and want.

az

I dont think that pro-black or pro-gay are silly terms not when you consider how many people, institutions and even turns of phrase are anti black or gay in the societies we live in. Being pro anything in such circumstances is necessary to put things right as laws and such like are going to change without some pressure.

Do you think the British parliament would have just given people sufferage without them making a noise and campaigning for it?

I know what you're trying to say, blicky, but I'm basically pro-human and couldn't give a toss if they are gay or black or whatever as long as they show themselves to be caring humans.

In the cases you are talking about I'd call myself anti-gay-bashing, anti-black-discrimination. Or whatever. Anti whatever stupid law made humans feel less so.

az