Stirring the mud

The response I have gotten on Dr. Maurice’s blog is interesting. It caused such uproar that Dr. Maurice took advantage of his busy schedule to not publish posts for the weekend. I think that was a wise move on his part.

I wonder why the upset over what I have said. Most of what I have said in my responses has been said at one time or another on Dr. Maurice’s blogs. Is it that some people are finally starting to see that the medical community is going to be called to account? That non-medical people (as the people on Dr. Maurice’s blog believe me to be) are not going to quietly go away?

It is important that individuals who are aching for their modesty issues in medical settings to be taken seriously stand up and take action. Visit with your doctor about your modesty concerns and insist that those concerns be addressed. Talk to as many people as you know about the need for respect for patient modesty in medical settings. Post on blogs such as this one or on Dr. Maurice’s blogs. Share these websites with your medical providers and others.

I am encouraged by Dr. Maurice’s blog and the reason he started it. He wants to make others in the medical field aware of the need for patient modesty. It seems to me that Dr. Maurice is fighting a battle over this very topic as his blog has many examples of self-acclaimed doctors stating that they do not need to make changes and refusing to believe the statistical numbers that researchers are repeatedly finding.

My husband tells me that I like stirring the mud after he reads and approves my posts. I encourage everyone to stir the mud over this issue.

Plain Jane

Submitted post to Dr. Maurice's blog

JSMD,

I think if you will go back and read my post you will find that I said that the statistics show that as many as 10% of the physicians are involved in sexual misconduct (or words to that affect). I personally consider “sexual misconduct” in the medical situation to be criminal which is why I contend that it is an assault. The Webster dictionary definition of assault is: “a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact”. I refuse to apologize to anyone for my feelings of what is assault and what is not. That is my privilege as you have the privilege of believing that physicians have the right to touch women in any context and manner they desire.

Another point that needs to be made here, the statistics that have been collected by research groups regarding this very issue are the ones I have used, not ones I have pulled out of thin air. The Vanderbilt study for example.

Anonymous on October 29^th, do a Google search using the words, doctor, sex, physician, sexual, fondling, misconduct, nurse etc. The best results seem to be with two word combinations such as “doctor misconduct” to limit the search results to more manageable numbers. I think you will be surprised at what you find.

JSMD, snide comments about my beliefs and comments are not going to change the facts. The medical community is in need of reform. Patient modesty, male or female, is more important than the rights of an individual wanting to work in a field that will allow them to see and touch a member of the opposite sex unclothed.

Reply to JSMD on Dr. Maurice's Blog

I was using “assault” in the context that any violation (improper touch, consensual sex, rape etc.) of a patient is an assault to that individual. “Infringing” on an individual’s intimacy rights is too soft of a word and not a correct assessment of how the individual feels.

If a woman was in a situation that every tenth man she saw was a sexual predator wouldn’t you advise her to avoid that situation?

JSMD, let me quote you so that I get it correct: “Few providers would risk years of study and their entire career. I'm sure the streets of big cities are far more dangerous for assaults.”

In going through some old posts on How Husbands Feel Yahoo group I found the following:

“I wonder if your wife would be grossed out if she realized there was a better than 1 in 10 chance that the doctor examining her is a sexual predator? Look, at any given moment, according the U.S. Dept. of Justice, some 200,000 men are incarcerated, or on parole or probation for offenses that fall under the broad category of "sex crimes". Bear in mind this includes everything from violent rape to exposing oneself, to hiring a prostitute. Now let us suppose (and this is just a guess on my part) that there are an additional 200,000 men who are guilty of a sex crime but have never been caught, or have been released from prison, etc. The adult male population of the U.S. is about 100,000,000. So, there is only a 1 in 4000 chance that an average man is a sex offender. Why does physician sex offense occur at a rate 25 times greater than the average male population, and more importantly, why is it tolerated?”

The figures come from the US Census, US Dept of Justice and the Vanderbilt and other studies on physician sexual misconduct.

I find that these statistics are appalling and are a disgrace to the medical community and are beyond acceptance. No wonder many people are becoming more and more insistent on same gender care. These statistics help cement my distrust of the medical community and the integrity of the “system”.

Equal opportunity laws have been a huge leveler in the treatment of minority groups such as women in the past. I have not said that men should not practice medicine or work in medical fields. What I have said is that men should not be working in an area where they will be in a position to examine, treat or care for women in situations where intimacy can be violated. JSMD, touting the “Equal opportunity laws” as more important than the rights of an individual seems to be a travesty of justice. If equal opportunity becomes more important than the rights of an individual, more and more people will refuse to receive medical care to preserve their emotional and physical wellbeing over their medical care. Yes, even to the point of death.

Equal Opportunity or Individual Rights

Here is a copy of a post that I have on Dr. Maurice's modesty blog. It has gotten some interesting feedback. I will post my rebuttal to one of the comments here also.

Taking the emotion out of the issue of same gender care is like asking a husband to not feel any emotion for his wife. One of the issues of same gender care is about maintaining the intimacy of an individual or marriage. Violation of intimacy is emotional and traumatic to the individual and/or spouse.

The rights of an individual to not be violated, or in a position where that may happen, over the rights of a person to work in their chosen field is in my opinion the issue that should never have occurred and same gender caregiving should be established sooner rather than later. It has been a long standing tradition that men are doctors. Doctors have taken birth out of the hands of midwives and brought birth into the medical realm. This preempting of the primary need of females has created a source of conflict for humanity. If women need to have medical care to deliver their child, why not bring the midwife into the hospital? Why not train women to treat other women?

The long standing bias has been that women need to be under the care of a man. This bias has its foundation in the Bible. It is only natural that men and women want to preserve their most intimate areas for their spouse. Same gender care does not prevent people from working in their chosen area of doctor/nurse/technician however it does limit to WHOM they give that care. Unfortunately, this very simple concept is being challenged? Why? Some people think it is because of equality and equal opportunity. Others very strongly feel that it is because of the opportunity for violation of the individual. If someone can prevent a crime it is considered prudent to do that, which is why people lock their doors. Why is it such a difficult thing to see that same gender care is a step in the prevention of assault?