Link

And 14 percent -- one in seven -- said they would not mention a procedure they believed to be morally wrong as a viable treatment option.

However, that stance is itself "morally questionable," contends one medical ethicist, Dr. David Stern, an associate professor of medicine and medical education at the University of Michigan.

No one is advocating that doctors perform procedures they object to, Stern said. However, "because we are in a position of power over patients who walk through the door, I think we have a professional responsibility to at least disclose treatments," said Stern, who was not involved in the study.

The findings, by a team from the University of Chicago, are published in the Feb. 8 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.

Endo's in my home town wont perscribe HRT to a TS patent... Its moraly wrong in there eyes to mess with a perfectly healthy "males" hormone levels in such a way......  But they'll gladly charge the money for all the tests they run before telling you this....   *Mumbles something inapropriate about catholics and evangelicists....*

Well. To give an opposite view sis.

I think there is some logic to this. I mean, the Hypocratic oath is do no harm. I think in some cases this is a moral judgement call. To me, do no harm means, for instance, prescribing suicide pills to a terminally ill patient. That is my moral system. Others disagree.

I think, ultimatly, a pharmacy or medical degree should give you a judgement that superceeds "The good lord says X" and what not.

And I do agree that transsexual health care should be outside this ambit. Those endos suck.

Bri

Quote from: BriWell. To give an opposite view sis.

I think there is some logic to this. I mean, the Hypocratic oath is do no harm. I think in some cases this is a moral judgement call. To me, do no harm means, for instance, prescribing suicide pills to a terminally ill patient. That is my moral system. Others disagree.

I think, ultimatly, a pharmacy or medical degree should give you a judgement that superceeds "The good lord says X" and what not.

Actually Spacekat, most medical schools opt for a modernized oath which does not mention anything about euthanasia, or abortion.

Only medical doctors (MD, DDS, DVM) have the ability to prescribe medication; the pharmacists are only there to dispense what physicians prescribe and inform the patients of the side effects of the drug being prescribed.  Pharmacists cannot prescribe any kind of medication in the US.

Rumors had it (at my place of employment) that there were a few surgeons who'd pray in the OR.....yeah, they were always ridiculed.


Modernized Hippocratic Oath

Quote from: LynnEndo's in my home town wont perscribe HRT to a TS patent... Its moraly wrong in there eyes to mess with a perfectly healthy "males" hormone levels in such a way...

Totally innapropriate for someone who is a medical doctor! perhaps it is time to find a different endo...

tinkerbell

One of our local doctors doesn't believe in abortion. Which would be fine if she would tell people. What she does instead, is delay things for her patient until it's too late for an abortion. That, in my opinion, is immoral.

Dennis

I would rather have a doctor tell me straight forward that they are not comfortable rather than to move away, or in the case Dennis mentioned move towards, the inevitable.

I have had some horrendous treatment by doctors.  One simply stopped seeing me, could no longer schedule an appointment which is very much the coward's way out.  The other was an ER doc and I would have much preferred to have been shuttled elsewhere rather than deal with what happened that night.

Well, so far as those endos go I dont see them at all.... My first time through transition Id travel out of state to see an endo... <It was a shorter drive to Arazona than it was to Dallas or Austin>  And now I have my blood tests done by my GP.... who dosnt really know what shes doing and well... yeah....  I CANT WAIT TO MOVE!!!

Quote from: Dennis on February 09, 2007, 09:09:05 AM
One of our local doctors doesn't believe in abortion. Which would be fine if she would tell people. What she does instead, is delay things for her patient until it's too late for an abortion. That, in my opinion, is immoral.

Dennis

It seems that would also be grounds to revoke her medical license.



beth

The consensus I am getting from the group, and it feels like it is fairly reasonable, is that doctors should be obligated to disclose all applicable methods of care and to be honest about whether they are morally willing to provide those treatments.  Ideally, the doctor should also offer a letter of referral to help speed up the process (and to make medical coverage a bit less complicated).  Even if the doctor does not offer the desired treatment, the patient can at least move on to a doctor that will provide it, and in a timely matter.

Of course, we run into trouble if an area is saturated by morally squeamish doctors.

Quote from: beth on February 09, 2007, 11:01:13 AM

Quote from: Dennis on February 09, 2007, 09:09:05 AM
One of our local doctors doesn't believe in abortion. Which would be fine if she would tell people. What she does instead, is delay things for her patient until it's too late for an abortion. That, in my opinion, is immoral.

Dennis

It seems that would also be grounds to revoke her medical license.



beth

Yep, hard to prove though. She does it by scheduling appointments with a long time delay in between, and various other stalling tactics. I can see it because from a lawyer's point of view, I see a number of people it's happening to. If you were the only one it was happening to, it would be hard to put a pattern together. I always advise people to 1. Get another doctor and 2. File a complaint.

Dennis