Harney refuses to guarantee funds for rape crisis centre

You might all find this a more rational report. What Harney said (see the Irish Times report, also reported on newstalk) is that she wanted the current level of funding to be maintained.

The Shane Hickey-penned story in the Irish Indo, meanwhile, chose to concentrate on the calls by Ellen O'Malley-Dunlop, CEO of the DRCC, that the fund be ring-fenced and the lack of a declared commitment by Harney to do that. Assuming that Harney was asked, I rather suspect the exchange ran something along the lines of: "Are you going to maintain the current level of funding?", "Yes, I hope to do that", "Are you going to ring-fence the funding?", "I'd first have to talk to the HSE about that", "Well she didn't say yes so that's a no, I can fill my 400-word allowance with that, boo-ya, go me". Made for a "better" headline than "Dublin Rape Crisis Centre CEO calls (or pleads, if you like boompf) for funding to be ring-fenced". (don't get me wrong, I'd probably get over the lack of principles in writing something like that if the pay was good enough but that's because I'm currently poor)

That'd be (at best) two rather different takes on what is essentially one story. I'll let you judge for yourselves which was the more rational newspaper report on the whole thing. I try not to criticise the Irish Independent more than once every two days for sensationalising something out of control and I already did that yesterday elsewhere on this forum. Not that they're the only culprits by a long shot but they're doing it quite a lot lately rather than just taking a declared editorial position on things, which would at least show some balls. I would, however, strongly recommend that anyone commenting take the time to read all three news reports that I've linked to in this post. After that, decide whether stones should be thrown and, if so, at whom.

As for the side-discussion on the fleeing graveyard rapists, that's got nothing to do with the funding for the DRCC or the attitude from either the Minister or the HSE executive as to funding for the DRCC. Perhaps there should be better facilities available in Kerry or more money available to the KRCC. Or specific types of doctor available 24/7 for such incidents in Cork. But it's sod-all to do with the declared thread topic, which is "Harney refuses to guarantee funds for rape crisis centre". Of course the Herald is part of the same group as the Irish Independent, which I add en passant.

I don't consider myself to be unusually imaginative, but this man understands why a woman who has been raped might have a problem about being examined by a male doctor, and believes that her needs be treated as important. It's not a reflection on any male doctor, but a recognition of the devastating impact of rape.

I don't accept johnnyskeleton's implication that giving assistance to rape victims should be regarded as a charity that is not entitled to state support. The reason why rape crisis centres exist is that there was a significant shortcoming in state provision, and the reason why government has given them financial support is that they were undertaking work which most people would regard as being part of the responsibility of the state. If I were attacked, beaten, and bloodied, the state has emergency services that would assist me, and those services are more or less adequate; if a woman were attacked and raped (an offence that is usually greater) the state's emergency services were less adequate, and the rape crisis centres emerged to supplement the state's inadequate provision.

28064212 wrote: »

How is it possible to handle that? There are few enough specialised doctors that can handle a rape case without restricting it further. What about instances where the aggressor was a woman and/or the victim was a man? What about when the aggressor was of the same race as the doctor? Hell, what if the rapist was a doctor? I don't think the victim would be too keen on being examined, but it's necessary. There's about a hundred factors that could remind a victim of the ordeal they've gone through, and trying to cater for that is impossible.

All of which seems to be a case for not taking the victim's feelings into account. Let's remember that most rape victims are women, and most rapists are men. And let's remember that the impact of rape is not merely physical, and that a medical examination after a rape is physically and psychologically invasive.

Just concentrate on providing the best service possible and leave it at that

The best service possible would include respecting the victim's feelings about what doctor conducts the examination.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

All of which seems to be a case for not taking the victim's feelings into account. Let's remember that most rape victims are women, and most rapists are men.

Most reported rape victims are female, committed by male attackers.

Lemming wrote: »

Most reported rape victims are female, committed by male attackers.

Cheap shot stuff.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Cheap shot stuff.

Not really. Pusing aside the reality of reported vs. unreported rape as its another thread on its own, there's an awful lot of noise about needing female doctors for medical examination of rape victims when the obvious is being ignored;

I'll stick to the pragmatic, unforunate as it is in being reality since anything else is opinion.

1. There is an acute shortage of frontline hospital staff - in the form of both nurses and doctors. Most of these work exceedingly long shifts at a stretch, in order to ensure coverage
2. THere is a hyper-acute shortage of money for public services.
3. Medical examination - as unfortunately necessary as it is - will by its nature be invasive regardless of whomever carries it out

At the end of the day, with the above pointed out, it comes down to there being a doctor available that matches the patient's request.

Further, We have no idea if the girl in question was informed that there were no female doctors available and/or that one would not be available for 'n' amount of time; giving her the option of waiting or opting for an available doctor. All we have is her aunt and a vested interest (a regional rape crisis centre wanting more money) banging a drum.


Now by all the above said and done;

What makes you think that a doctor's sex has in determining their ability to deal with a rape victim? I've encountered a few female doctors with the bed-side manner of a dead badger. Likewise a few male doctors of same. I wouldn't have wished any on somebody with a broken bone, never mind a rape victim. By contrast, I've encountered a few of each that are the direct opposite and great with patients.

Personally, I think that a) the victim should be given the choice of receiving help ASAP or having to wait at their own discretion until help that they deem suitable is available, and b) any doctor (regardless of sex) that may potentially have to deal with rape should be given some sort of rape counselling training - if even at a rudimentary level - to allow them carry out medical examination in as sensitive a manner as possible.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's a waste of time discussing such matters with people whose views seem not to be informed by any sort of compassion.

This is a discussion site. Not everyone is going to agree with how you see things.

I do sympathise with rape victims - as I do any victim of violent crime who is left mentally and/or physically scarred for life.

But, firstly I take anything I read in a paper with a pinch of sale as I have witnessed first-hand how a journalist will paint a government spokesperson's (DoJ) words to suit their own agenda (guess what that is? Newspaper sales). And there is so very little in the article being discussed to go on. And secondly, as unfortunate as it is, we live in an imperfect world and can only do the best that we can do (consider that people have died en route to hospitals in this country due to extremely long commutes and/or non-availability of ambulance resources). Had the medical staff at Cork not done their very best to help the girl, I'd draw umbrage at their insensitivity. If they did their best with what was available, then there's little else that can be done right now given the state of the nation's finances, unless they can redirect existing funding or delivery more efficiency elsewhere to cover the additional costs being demanded in providing additional medical staff

Lemming wrote: »

...
I do sympathise with rape victims - as I do any victim of violent crime who is left mentally and/or physically scarred for life.

But that sympathy seems not to extend far enough for you to accept that a rape victim should have the right to have a female doctor conduct the examination. In your first post in this thread, you said: "I imagine (and "imagine" is the only qualified statement either of us can make here dan_d), that if I were a rape victim (yes, men get raped too) whatever sex/race/hair-colour the doctor was would be about the last thing on my mind ... ", and let that stand there as if it were a case for not recognising that a rape victim might want a female doctor to conduct the examination. It's not a case for anything; it's your speculation (happily, untested) about how you, as a man, might feel.

But, firstly I take anything I read in a paper with a pinch of sale as I have witnessed first-hand how a journalist will paint a government spokesperson's (DoJ) words to suit their own agenda (guess what that is? Newspaper sales). ...

My comments in this thread are not based on newspaper reports of any one situation. I am advocating the case for making female doctors available for medical examination in rape cases, and allowing the victim the right to have one of those doctors deal with the case.

There is no shortage of women doctors in this country, and I am confident that the majority would, even if off duty at the time, be willing to come on duty to deal with a rape case. The Gardaí almost always manage to find a woman member of the force to deal with women who have been raped or sexually assaulted. I am sure that in some cases an off-duty officer comes in. It seems reasonable to suppose that the medical profession would be similarly willing to be helpful.

Nody wrote: »

Tell you what, you point out exactly what part of the hospitals services available today should be cut/have a price added to compensate the cost. How about we cut the 20 Mil from young mother support, or from long term care, is that ok with you? Because you're arguing for money to be taken from some where (there is no additional money to take and if you mention Banks or Builders then you clearly have marked yourself as utterly ignorant about economy) to pay for all of this, so please do tell what service do you want to cut to compensate?

No, I'll tell you something different: rape is important.

The "system" recognises that at many levels, and resources are already used to deal with rape cases. What I am arguing is very simple: where a medical investigation is conducted in a rape case, and the victim is too distressed to allow a man conduct an intimate examination, then a woman doctor should be found. It's not a matter of finding significant extra resources; it's mainly a matter of how resources are deployed.

Further, I would say that if there are insufficient resources assigned to deal with rape, then the funding must be found. I don't buy into your game of choosing what to cut in order to fund it. That's strawman stuff. And the rules you apply to your game are pettifogging: why should it be funded by cutting hospital services rather than cutting something completely different or, heaven forfend, by raising some revenue?

P. Breathnach wrote: »

But that sympathy seems not to extend far enough for you to accept that a rape victim should have the right to have a female doctor conduct the examination. In your first post in this thread, you said: "I imagine (and "imagine" is the only qualified statement either of us can make here dan_d), that if I were a rape victim (yes, men get raped too) whatever sex/race/hair-colour the doctor was would be about the last thing on my mind ... ", and let that stand there as if it were a case for not recognising that a rape victim might want a female doctor to conduct the examination. It's not a case for anything; it's your speculation (happily, untested) about how you, as a man, might feel

And now you're putting words in my mouth. I at no point in time said that a victim should not have the right to choose a doctor. You seem to have glossed over my subsequent comment regarding providing options in very a la carte cherry picking fashion; that I believe the victim should have the option put before them. But reality being reality, options may not always be what are considered best desirable; in this case that there will always be a doctor of your choosing at hand, prompting you to either opt for receiving help in short order, or having to wait until a doctor you do want becomes available.

What I also inferred with my "if I was " comment was simple; to somebody in need (and I would consider a rape victim to be somebody desperately in need), a doctor ... any doctor ... represents help. The alternative is to sit in suffering until a doctor that one chooses becomes available.

My comments in this thread are not based on newspaper reports of any one situation. I am advocating the case for making female doctors available for medical examination in rape cases, and allowing the victim the right to have one of those doctors deal with the case.

In that we are on agreement. I never said I wasn't. You did.

There is no shortage of women doctors in this country, and I am confident that the majority would, even if off duty at the time, be willing to come on duty to deal with a rape case. The Gardaí almost always manage to find a woman member of the force to deal with women who have been raped or sexually assaulted. I am sure that in some cases an off-duty officer comes in. It seems reasonable to suppose that the medical profession would be similarly willing to be helpful.

The problem; in context of the original post; in relation the above is that we're talking about a more rural area where there clearly is a shortage of female doctors. I'd dare say there's a shortage of medical services in general for such areas given teh number of very high profile deaths/incidents that have occured over the last decade in that regard.

You are talking about cities for both medical services and Gardai; where this isn't an issue owing to numbers and proximity/availabillity at short notice.

And again, I will pull you back to the point of frontline medical staff doing long shifts. So you have an off-duty female doctor. She's done 36 hours straight, and then gone on a two hour commute home since this is a rural area. Whilst I would praise her for being prepared to come back in at a moments notice; you raise other issues - some of which set dangerous precedent and can easily lead to further harm and/or death.