Another Doctor Please

Winty

So I live in Wimbledon, London and I went to the doctors with my little 9 month old daughter.

While sitting in the doctors office (we were called in to wait in her office before she arrived for work) I noticed a very prominent plaque on the desk proclaiming membership of the Catholic Medical Association.

I went back out to the desk with baby in toe and asked to see another doctor. When questioned why, I said that I did not want a person who believes in religion as my child's doctor. The receptionist got quite mad and told me I was being ridiculous.

Was I being ridiculous to ask that the person looking after my child's health should be of a intellectual standing beyond believing in a big man in the sky who is also his son and support a cult that has destroyed millions of lives?

D4RK ONION

Unless you're trying to get the pill, I can't see what the problem is. Education and intelligence does not have to be interlinked with religion.

Winty

Sorry dont agree

We are at the start of something great with Stem Cells, what is the Catholic view?

The Catholic Church is against embryonic stem-cell research because it involves the destruction of human embryos. Pope John Paul II said embryonic stem-cell research is related to abortion, euthanasia and other attacks on innocent life.

http://www.americancatholic.org/news/stemcell/

AG2R

Wow you were bang out of order imo.
He is a doctor and is fully entitled to his beliefs. Do you only go to the local shop because you know the shop keeper is an atheist?

eoin5

Winty wrote: »

So I live in Wimbledon, London and I went to the doctors with my little 9 month old daughter.

While sitting in the doctors office (we were called in to wait in her office before she arrived for work) I noticed a very prominent plaque on the desk proclaiming membership of the Catholic Medical Association.

I went back out to the desk with baby in toe and asked to see another doctor. When questioned why, I said that I did not want a person who believes in religion as my child's doctor. The receptionist got quite mad and told me I was being ridiculous.

Was I being ridiculous to ask that the person looking after my child's health should be of a intellectual standing beyond believing in a big man in the sky who is also his son and support a cult that has destroyed millions of lives?

Maybe he worked out that in the future computers could potentially create very believable simulated universes. For every few true universe then there could be a very large number of simulated universes that we could live in. Many of those in each real universe could have simulated gods and heavens and hells. So it seems more likely that we live in a simulated universe with a god than a real one without.

Winty

AG2R wrote: »

Wow you were bang out of order imo.
He is a doctor and is fully entitled to his beliefs. Do you only go to the local shop because you know the shop keeper is an atheist?

He was a she and my daughters life is not in the hands of the guy in Tesco

liamw

AG2R wrote: »

He is a doctor and is fully entitled to his beliefs. Do you only go to the local shop because you know the shop keeper is an atheist?

The issue arises when your beliefs can impact your job. I probably wouldn't go see a doctor that was a firm believer in homeopathy.

way out of order

MagicMarker

You imply that the doctor is too stupid to treat your daughter, that's pretty retarded in fairness.

TheBunk1

Ridiculous imo. Do you ask every doctor you visit what their religion is?

keppler

Would you apply the same logic to a mechanic inspecting the brakes on your car? That would put your whole family's lives at risk. Personally, if I found out that a doctor I was attending refused to give e.c or the pill to patients I'd imagine I would demand a new one but for just being religious...I think you're getting carried away

HUNK

I think you overreacted. She's not a faith healer, she's a qualified medical doctor.

Winty

keppler wrote: »

Would you apply the same logic to a mechanic inspecting the brakes on your car? That would put your whole family's lives at risk. Personally, if I found out that a doctor I was attending refused to give e.c or the pill to patients I'd imagine I would demand a new one but for just being religious...I think you're getting carried away

Just being religious is fine, why did she feel the need to have a sign on her desk proclaming her membership of the Catholic Medical Association

http://www.catholicmedicalassociation.org.uk

Bloody Nipples

Way to discriminate against someone for their religious beliefs.

Winty

keppler wrote: »

Would you apply the same logic to a mechanic inspecting the brakes on your car? That would put your whole family's lives at risk.

My mechanic does not igore new developments in car technology

Winty

TheBunk1 wrote: »

Ridiculous imo. Do you ask every doctor you visit what their religion is?

I did not ask her she felt the need to have a sign on her desk

AhSureTisGrand

You seem not to have noticed that highly intelligent people can believe in fùcking stupid things. As long as it doesn't get in the way of his job I don't see why it should be a problem

i saw a rosary beads thing on the bus the other day, i didn't jump out in sheer panic that the bus driver would suddenly forget how to drive or take us on a detour to a church because he believes in jesus
good lord

Bloody Nipples

Winty wrote: »

Sorry dont agree

We are at the start of something great with Stem Cells, what is the Catholic view?

http://www.americancatholic.org/news/stemcell/

And unless your daughter was in a position to benefit from stem cell treatment, this is fairly irrelevant in your case.

Winty

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

As long as it doesn't get in the way of his job I don't see why it should be a problem

It does get in the way her ethics are controlled by Rome

Winty

bluewolf wrote: »

i saw a rosary beads thing on the bus the other day, i didn't jump out in sheer panic that the bus driver would suddenly forget how to drive or take us on a detour to a church because he believes in jesus
good lord

Not the same thing, she has a docturine clouding her decision making

AG2R

You do know all doctors act on their own ethics and not the ethics of the Catholic Church?
Yeah that doc prob wouldn't do abortions or Euthanasia but thats illegal so that doesn't even matter.
I'm actually still in disbelieve at this tbh.

alchemist33

Winty wrote: »

My mechanic does not igore new developments in car technology

You don't know she's ignoring them. She may have a view, and it may have been formed on ethical principles after long consideration.

But you'll never know now.

Winty

Winty wrote: »

Not the same thing, she has a docturine clouding her decision making

yeah, 'preserve life'. terrible habit in a doctor

Sarky

Most religious doctors in my experiences tend to put religious doctrine aside for the sake of not getting sued into oblivion. My own father was a GP who does mass every Sunday at least, eats fish on friday, goes to confession, all that guff. But he never had a problem stocking contraceptives in the dispensary.

TheBunk1

Winty wrote: »

I did not ask her she felt the need to have a sign on her desk

I know you didn't ask her, but if you feel so strongly about it, I'd would have thought you'd always ask a doctor their religion. Just to be sure :rolleyes:

I don't see how it would interfere with her job as a doctor.

AG2R

OP do you cross the road to avoid a church?

keppler

Winty wrote: »

Just being religious is fine, why did she feel the need to have a sign on her desk proclaming her membership of the Catholic Medical Association

http://www.catholicmedicalassociation.org.uk

What! hold on here You said when asked by the receptionist "I did not want a person who believes in religion as my child's doctor" that's a far cry from what your saying now.
Maybe if you hung around her office and questioned her about her moral standpoints before judging her we might be able to have a more in depth conversation about why she needed to do that, but I guess we'll never know now.

Winty wrote: »

My mechanic does not igore new developments in car technology

Neither do doctors, some just happen to disagree with them for moral reasons and wont carry out certain procedures or administer certain medications. This doesn't mean they are too stupid to understand these developments or realise their potential benefits!

robindch

Winty wrote: »

I noticed a very prominent plaque on the desk proclaiming membership of the Catholic Medical Association.

If I was stuck, I wouldn't be all that concerned unless I happened to be looking for advice on contraception, or happened to be pregnant (which, being a guy, is unlikely). The problem with the latter being that some catholic medics believe, or are required and expected to believe, that a doomed embryo is more important than the life of the mother and will refuse to abort, despite the certainty that both will die if they don't. This is true of at least one maternity hospital in Dublin (I think Holles Street, though I'm not sure).

This came to a head in Phoenix, Arizona last year, in a case in which the mother had to abort at eleven weeks, or face certain death and killing her embryo too. The local bishop was so incensed at the choice the doctors made, that he stripped the hospital of its catholic links.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/22/us-catholic-bishop-hospital-abortion

That said, if somebody was proclaiming their affiliation to some religion, I'd treat it just the same as if I saw somebody parading their political affiliation and I'd probably make a polite, respectful comment to the receptionist that this kind of thing is inappropriate in a professional environment, and go find another doctor somewhere else.

recedite

AG2R wrote: »

You do know all doctors act on their own ethics and not the ethics of the Catholic Church?
Yeah that doc prob wouldn't do abortions or Euthanasia but thats illegal so that doesn't even matter.
I'm actually still in disbelieve at this tbh.

Thats a sweeping statement. Sounds like this doctor gets their ethics from the RCC. Isn't that what the plaque is all about? Anyway abortions are legal in London.

eoin5 wrote: »

Maybe he worked out that in the future computers could potentially create very believable simulated universes. For every few true universe then there could be a very large number of simulated universes that we could live in. Many of those in each real universe could have simulated gods and heavens and hells. So it seems more likely that we live in a simulated universe with a god than a real one without.

No, Paschal's Wager again. There are other equally likely possibilities there, such as all the simulated universes without any god, and those with strange wacky gods.

oldrnwisr

TheBunk1 wrote: »

I don't see how it would interfere with her job as a doctor.

Really?

Woman denied pill on 'religious basis'.

As Rebecca Watson said: "If you can't do the job, then don't do the job."

eoin5

recedite wrote: »

No, Paschal's Wager again. There are other equally likely possibilities there, such as all the simulated universes without any god, and those with strange wacky gods.

Yea totally, the op seemed pretty sure a belief in god makes a person less intelligent. All I wanted to do was show the op a complicated but fresh one to see if it would end in an open discussion.

pH

OP - absolutely, that sign is there as a clear "indicator" of the fact that they let their religious beliefs affect the way they treat their patients - and you have every right to do what you did.

ShooterSF

AG2R wrote: »

OP do you cross the road to avoid a church?

I'm sure the OP just walks past/around it like most people. Not like it's gonna jump out at you.

---

I think the OP could have handled things better. Unless it was something major I'd have dealt with that GP this time and on future appointments specify someone else. I do this myself for other reasons and the receptionists don't seem to get upset as it's less "scene making".

Zaph

OP, you asked if your stance was ridiculous, and most of the replies agree that you overreacted, yet your immediate response to them is that you disagree. Why ask the question if you've already made up your mind that you're right?

As regards the doctors religious views, what would you have done if the doctor had treated your child and you only saw the plaque on the way out? Or what if there was no plaque and you were totally oblivious to her religious views? Unless she refused a particular treatment, for example stem cell therapy, or contraception/abortion because they were against her religious views, then really you have no grounds for complaint. I'm an atheist, but as long as my GP gives me a standard of care that I'm happy with and that I don't believe he's compromising on anything because of his religion he can be a devout Pastafarian for all I care.

ballsymchugh

this is similar to the thread about a year ago where a poster kicked up stink after being asked his religion on admission to the hospital.
mountain out of a non-existant molehill.

Fanny Cradock

pH wrote: »

OP - absolutely, that sign is there as a clear "indicator" of the fact that they let their religious beliefs affect the way they treat their patients - and you have every right to do what you did.

Nobody is denying the OP his/her right to walk away from the service offered by a doctor. That is the nature of business. The point is that most people are being consistent when they point out the rather obvious fact that the OP's erstwhile doctor has her own rights. One of which happens to be putting up a plaque in her business detailing her membership of a particular organisation.

ShooterSF

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Nobody is denying the OP his/her right to walk away from the service offered by a doctor. That is the nature of business. The point is that most people are being consistent when they point out the rather obvious fact that the OP's erstwhile doctor has her own rights. One of which happens to be putting up a plaque in her business detailing her membership of a particular organisation.

TBF I don't think anyone has said she should not be allowed to display the plaque. Hell it might even bring her in some business from catholic families in london who would prefer to have a catholic GP if their kids ever went for eh what do you call it, parental planning advice.

Not that going on current information I agree with the severity (well more severe than was needed) of the OP's actions.

robindch

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

One of which happens to be putting up a plaque in her business detailing her membership of a particular organisation.

And likewise, a prospective customer can see this plaque and draw conclusions -- in this case, that the doctor considered it appropriate to introduce religion into what should be a professional relationship.

Quite apart from the obvious problems with the possibility of counter-factual, Vatican-inspired advice on contraception and non-utilitarian advice on abortion (specifically as above), I'd think that a doctor, or any professional, who did this was, frankly, a bit stupid and I'd really prefer to go to somebody who's a bit brighter.

Same as I'd avoid somebody who had a Sinn Fein, or any political plaque, on his/her wall.

pH

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Nobody is denying the OP his/her right to walk away from the service offered by a doctor. That is the nature of business. The point is that most people are being consistent when they point out the rather obvious fact that the OP's erstwhile doctor has her own rights. One of which happens to be putting up a plaque in her business detailing her membership of a particular organisation.

This isn't about his/her right to put up a plaque, this is about their right to treat patients in a public healthcare system through the lens of their religion.

Now I know that your Christianity is the big swinging penis of all religions, and everyone should bend over and learn about it and accept it, but you know what? screw that?

I've no interest in trying to figure out what silliness this person believes in (yes I know that in your head I need to know this) and which treatments they'll refuse to tell me about or give me access to. I've no idea on their views on homosexuality, unmarried parents, prenatal testing, vasectomies, abortion or the wearing of mixed fibres - I don't want to find out about them, I don't want their idiotic dogma affecting my and my family's healthcare.

As for those above who "don't mind", fair play to you for reading in detail exactly what treatments this doctor won't tell you about - just be prepared to keep up with the list - if they can get away with that stuff they'll probably keep adding more, oh and fair play in allowing yourself be subjected to their narrow-minded religious dogma whilst getting medical treatment you've paid for. Nothing like knowing that your healthcare professional thinks you're a sick hell-bound sinner - and is quite happy to let you know this.

nozzferrahhtoo

AG2R wrote: »

He is a doctor and is fully entitled to his beliefs.

I am not sure the OP is suggesting otherwise. The doctor is entitled to his beliefs. The OP is entitled to ask for a different doctor. That is all he did. He did not burst in trying to remove or change the doctors beliefs, or prevent him/her from holding them. He merely asked to be assigned a different doctor, something we all have the right to do.

Now whether people think he is over reacting or his reasons for asking for another doctor are not sound is a different discussion.... one maybe worth having... but it has nothing to do with whether the doctor is entitled to his/her beliefs or not.

The only person I would call outright "wrong" in the scenario described by the OP is the receptionist who's job it is to give a person another doctor if requested, not to get mad or to refuse or to make an issue of it when someone does so.

Finding the right doctor is a task for all of us. Each of us has things that makes us uncomfortable with a doctor. Some people prefer one of the same sex, some do not. Some people want a younger one, some do not. Some people in this case want one that do not publicly espouse their religious beliefs, some do not. The point is when you are uncomfortable with a doctor for WHATEVER reason you should seek another one, and in a medical practice should be facilitated in that endeavor. The sticking point for me in the OP therefore is that his request was met with aggression and anger. If the story is true at all... the receptionist in question should be reprimanded.

Imagine for example if you were going to a practice of perfectly competent doctors and the one you were assigned was female. You asked for a change of doctor and when asked "why" you say "I prefer a male doctor". Imagine your horror if that was met with the receptionist getting angry, aggressive and telling you that you were being "ridiculous". It is simply not the receptionists place to do so. At most they should say "Sorry we are not in a position to facilitate your request, have you considered these other fine practices that I have information on here...."

As for whether the OPs reasons for wanting another doctor are sound or not.... most of the things that make us comfortable with a doctor are subjective and trying to reason them will make them look as ridiculous as the OPs. I myself want young doctors not old ones. No reason. That is just me. Some people think that is ridiculous, so be it. Some people might think worrying about the sex of your doctor is ridiculous too. In this case some people think the OPs reasons are ridiculous.

At the end of the day however, whether your reasons are reasonable or purely subjective, if you are not comfortable with your doctor.... you change doctor. Simple as. It is our right.

liamw

Zaph wrote: »

OP, you asked if your stance was ridiculous, and most of the replies agree that you overreacted, yet your immediate response to them is that you disagree. Why ask the question if you've already made up your mind that you're right?

He disagreed and provided his reasons. That's called debating different viewpoints or playing devil's advocate - I don't see why this bothers you. It would be a pretty boring discussion if everyone just agreed with everyone else.

As regards the doctors religious views, what would you have done if the doctor had treated your child and you only saw the plaque on the way out?

Had the option to change doctors from the next visitation onwards...

Or what if there was no plaque and you were totally oblivious to her religious views?

No action obviously - is that a serious question. One thing you're overlooking here is that the doctor explictly felt the need to put that plaque in a public facing position - this, to me, would indicate a strong religious belief and therefore more likely to influence professional decisions. Perhaps not, but why take the risk if you're not fully comfortable?

Unless she refused a particular treatment, for example stem cell therapy, or contraception/abortion because they were against her religious views, then really you have no grounds for complaint.

He didn't complain by the sounds of it, just requested another doctor with whom he would feel more comfortable - given that religious doctrine can cloud decision making that's all he needed to know.

I'm an atheist, but as long as my GP gives me a standard of care that I'm happy with and that I don't believe he's compromising on anything because of his religion he can be a devout Pastafarian for all I care.

Good for you.

Winty

bluewolf wrote: »

yeah, 'preserve life'. terrible habit in a doctor

Does the RCC preserve life in Africa via the spread of AIDS without safe sex

Winty

ShooterSF wrote: »

I think the OP could have handled things better. Unless it was something major I'd have dealt with that GP this time and on future appointments specify someone else. I do this myself for other reasons and the receptionists don't seem to get upset as it's less "scene making".

That is fair, I was just taken aback by the fact so felt the need to have the plaque pride of place

kate.m

...was this a gp, nchd or consultant?

Because GPs don't have anything to do with stem cell research. They send you on to a consultant who will recommend it if necessary.

Unless I was going to look for contraceptives or information on the termination of a pregnancy I don't think it would have made a difference...and my doctor is catholic, told me at the start, and still gives out contraceptives ect....

Osgoodisgood

I wouldn't have discussed anything with the receptionist but I certainly would have left and found another doctor. The fact that the plaque is there at all indicated that this doctor places a worrying amount of significance in something that is regularly anti-science.

pH

kate.m wrote: »

Unless I was going to look for contraceptives or information on the termination of a pregnancy I don't think it would have made a difference...and my doctor is catholic, told me at the start, and still gives out contraceptives ect....

Nice of you, researching and figuring out what that particular cult may have a problem with and deciding you're OK in this instance, the health care you need, have paid for and are entitled to will be made available to you.

What happens if it said "Islamic Medical Association" or "Mormon" or "Seventh Day Adventist" or "Church of the Merry Wicca Witch" - are you expected to go home and research what these people find offensive and against their religion and won't be providing (or at least looking down on you if you have the temerity to ask for it).

As a patient you shouldn't need to know what might be offensive to the doctor behind the desk and forbidden - just because this was was Catholic and we're expected to know is no excuse.

magicbastarder

to be honest, i think it's a good thing that the doctor was advertising that they consider their membership a good thing; good enough to make public in the office.
in the sense that if a doctor is going to be influenced by catholic teaching, it's good to know about it before going in rather than not knowing when you go in.

AG2R

btw the generalization that anyone who is Catholic is totally anti-science is a joke. Surely they wouldn't have went into medicine if that was the case

robindch

AG2R wrote: »

btw the generalization that anyone who is Catholic is totally anti-science is a joke.

I don't think that anybody's seriously saying that all catholics are anti-science.

It is fair to say, that while catholicism, as a worldview, is deeply anti-science, I think that most catholics can get over it without too much ill-effect by compartmentalizing their beliefs.

ShooterSF

OP, you listed some medical reasoning behind your decision. I wonder if you are being fully honest with us and yourself or if you justified your emotional decision after. It's perfectly acceptable to say that you didn't want to deal with this person as you had a moral objection to their public support of the catholic church. It's fair to assume that some of her earnings are funneled into the church and you would prefer where possible to boycott such an occurence. If true it would negate a pointless discussion on stem cell research and it's relevance to GPs.


I'm not claiming that you're lying by the way or that I can read your mind. It just seems from further posts that it's atleast part of the reason.