Interviewer misinformed/full of it?

[Druggernaut]

---

Members don't see this ad.

The thing I was getting at (merely speculative) is that if there was a situation where someone may need an emergency c-section, the ability to do so would fall under at least SOMEONE's definition of minimally competent.

Nah. Plenty of neurosurgeons don't get credentialed at hospitals for cranial procedures because they don't want to be on the call schedule, and just do spine cases instead.

They're trained for it, but they don't file the paperwork to do these emergent, life-saving procedures to avoid the liability and worse lifestyle, and instead choose to do more financially rewarding procedures. I'm sure an OB/Gyn could do the same thing.

 

[jl lin]

The question itself wasn't really as important as getting the right answer... "Of couuuurse I'd be happy to compromise my values at the first sign of a lawsuit!"

Boom. Accepted.

 

[jl lin]

Don't even need extenuating circumstances.

Docs "fire" patients all the time for not vaccinating their kids, not quitting smoking, being obese, no-showing for multiple appointments, etc. Not necessarily for these things themselves (aside from the no-show), but more because after countless conversations the "relationship" just isn't working out because the two parties aren't seeing eye-to-eye.

I have a personal acquaintance who is quite obese and this eventually led to chronic knee issues, including a couple of surgeries. Over and over again her doc emphasized that her weight was the source of the problems and until she lost significant poundage, everything he or the ortho specialists could do was merely a short-term solution. She didn't lose weight (just gained more) and kept hounding her physician over and over to "do something more". Eventually he just told her that he was sorry but he couldn't see her anymore until she had lost weight. Was quite sad since I saw all this from the "outside" as a friend of the patient.

The vaccine stuff happens a lot:

More Doctors 'Fire' Vaccine Refusers

Also, when you say you are familiar with "ethical laws", what are those? There are state and federal laws (legal system) and then there are ethical guidelines (set forth by specialty bodies and medical organizations). Not following one gets you fined/jailed while not obeying the other gets you dirty looks, bad publicity, and maybe in extreme cases a revoked license.

You are right about having to give patients adequate notice and time when "firing" them so that they can find care elsewhere if they so choose. Otherwise it may be abandonment.

It's interesting stuff. Obviously you'd hope that most doctors would only resort to such measures as a last resort, but it's important to know the distinction between guideline and actual law. I also think it's funny how the "abortion scenario" is a classic interview dilemma that almost everyone gets asked eventually... because that's not real life. PCPs almost never perform abortions, but rather the moms-to-be-(not) go to abortion clinics or someplace where there won't be any objecting providers to begin with.

My guess is when the government steps in more and takes more control of healthcare, the, shall we say, opportunities for "firing or refusing patients" will become less and less.

 

[jl lin]

Your an idiot. It was an interview, tell him what he wants to hear. What did your moral code get you. A big fat rejection.

What a gem you are. 🙄

A person doesn't necessarily live by a moral code b/c of what it will get him or her. It becomes part of who you are or it doesn't. Regardless a person that waivers on core moral beliefs lacks character--and that's a bigger issue.

 

[pre med 2014]

The question itself wasn't really as important as getting the right answer... "Of couuuurse I'd be happy to compromise my values at the first sign of a lawsuit!"

Boom. Accepted.

This would be hilarious, if it didn't have such unfortunate consequences.

 

[pre med 2014]

My guess is when the government steps in more and takes more control of healthcare, the, shall we say, opportunities for "firing or refusing patients" will become less and less.

Isn't it Ironic that the first black president is bringing back slavery, I.e. forced labor?

I'd rather pick cotton against my will in the outdoors than accept government plans where I can go to federal prison on the whim of a bureaucrat for not entering a code correctly and having no avenue for a fair trial whatsoever. At least under private slavery you can run away and it's cheaper for them to get another slave than search for you. Forced employment for the government is much worse.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Isn't it Ironic that the first black president is bringing back slavery, I.e. forced labor?

I'd rather pick cotton against my will in the outdoors than accept government plans where I can go to federal prison on the whim of a bureaucrat for not entering a code correctly and having no avenue for a fair trial whatsoever. At least under private slavery you can run away and it's cheaper for them to get another slave than search for you. Forced employment for the government is much worse.

You see.....



Its.....



I want to take this as facetious.... but given your other input......

 

[La Presse]

Isn't it Ironic that the first black president is bringing back slavery, I.e. forced labor?

I'd rather pick cotton against my will in the outdoors than accept government plans where I can go to federal prison on the whim of a bureaucrat for not entering a code correctly and having no avenue for a fair trial whatsoever. At least under private slavery you can run away and it's cheaper for them to get another slave than search for you. Forced employment for the government is much worse.

wut

 

[touchpause13]

Isn't it Ironic that the first black president is bringing back slavery, I.e. forced labor?

I'd rather pick cotton against my will in the outdoors than accept government plans where I can go to federal prison on the whim of a bureaucrat for not entering a code correctly and having no avenue for a fair trial whatsoever. At least under private slavery you can run away and it's cheaper for them to get another slave than search for you. Forced employment for the government is much worse.

😱

u've got to be kidding me

 

[Sophocles]

Isn't it Ironic that the first black president is bringing back slavery, I.e. forced labor?

I'd rather pick cotton against my will in the outdoors than accept government plans where I can go to federal prison on the whim of a bureaucrat for not entering a code correctly and having no avenue for a fair trial whatsoever. At least under private slavery you can run away and it's cheaper for them to get another slave than search for you. Forced employment for the government is much worse.

Is this guy serious???

 

[Frazier]

Isn't it Ironic that the first black president is bringing back slavery, I.e. forced labor?

I'd rather pick cotton against my will in the outdoors than accept government plans where I can go to federal prison on the whim of a bureaucrat for not entering a code correctly and having no avenue for a fair trial whatsoever. At least under private slavery you can run away and it's cheaper for them to get another slave than search for you. Forced employment for the government is much worse.

I am white as snow and rarely find things offensive... but this made, even me, cringe.

 

[pre med 2014]

😱

u've got to be kidding me

I'm not the only one to call it slavery. So being forced to work for an employer against your will an then not being compensated for your services isn't slavery? Furthermore, being subject to cruel punishment for doing nothing wrong isn't slavery?

You are against lawyers who sue doctors, but all of the sudden if it's a federal bureaucrat punishing a doctor we are the bad guys all of the sudden? Interesting.

 

[Praefectus]

Isn't it Ironic that the first black president is bringing back slavery, I.e. forced labor?

I'd rather pick cotton against my will in the outdoors than accept government plans where I can go to federal prison on the whim of a bureaucrat for not entering a code correctly and having no avenue for a fair trial whatsoever. At least under private slavery you can run away and it's cheaper for them to get another slave than search for you. Forced employment for the government is much worse.

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

 

[PikminOC]

As a doc, I don't like seeing kids be born into an environment where they are not wanted...or be subjected to a system when parents cant take care of their kids...

 

[Sophocles]

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Probably the best movie scene ever!!!👍

And good application of it.

 

[pre med 2014]

Probably the best movie scene ever!!!👍

And good application of it.

Go ahead and chastise me for rambling about the abuses in the system, chances are in real life me and you would agree on creating more doctor autonomy. You, I'm sure are against lawyers suing doctors for frivolous claims, but at least they have to go through a legitimate legal system and test the evidence. Just wait until you must abandon rational thought and well accepted scientific methods to treat a patient for the worse just to please an official or in order to avoid heavy fines and prison time.

 

[Praefectus]

Go ahead and chastise me for rambling about the abuses in the system, chances are in real life me and you would agree on creating more doctor autonomy. You, I'm sure are against lawyers suing doctors for frivolous claims, but at least they have to go through a legitimate legal system and test the evidence. Just wait until you must abandon rational thought and well accepted scientific methods to treat a patient for the worse just to please an official or in order to avoid heavy fines and prison time.

 

[SpecterGT260]

As a doc, I don't like seeing kids be born into an environment where they are not wanted...or be subjected to a system when parents cant take care of their kids...

Regardless of personal stance, it is relevant to compare this to asking someone who was adopted if they wish they had been aborted instead.

 

[def1]

I'm not the only one to call it slavery. So being forced to work for an employer against your will an then not being compensated for your services isn't slavery? Furthermore, being subject to cruel punishment for doing nothing wrong isn't slavery?

You are against lawyers who sue doctors, but all of the sudden if it's a federal bureaucrat punishing a doctor we are the bad guys all of the sudden? Interesting.

You're not being forced to do anything. If you don't like the new regulations go find another career.

 

[SpecterGT260]

You're not being forced to do anything. If you don't like the new regulations go find another career.

Well nobody FORCED the slaves to do anything either. if they didnt want to be slaves they had the option to endure whipping or lynching 🙄

 

[PikminOC]

Regardless of personal stance, it is relevant to compare this to asking someone who was adopted if they wish they had been aborted instead.

So its better to force a woman to carry a baby to term? Its not like we can toss it into an an incubator at 6 weeks.

I have seen so many women abuse substances to try to abort the fetus themselves.

 

[def1]

Well nobody FORCED the slaves to do anything either. if they didnt want to be slaves they had the option to endure whipping or lynching 🙄

With options like those, I wonder why so many chose to stay slaves..

 

[def1]

So its better to force a woman to carry a baby to term? Its not like we can toss it into an an incubator at 6 weeks.

I have seen so many women abuse substances to try to abort the fetus themselves.

You can easily flip this and say is it better to force death upon an innocent being because the woman was irresponsible and is not willing to own up to her consequences?

Obviously there are varying degrees of situations. The above wouldn't apply to rape or possible harm to the mother.

 

[touchpause13]

You can easily flip this and say is it better to force death upon an innocent being because the woman was irresponsible and is not willing to own up to her consequences?

Obviously there are varying degrees of situations. The above wouldn't apply to rape or possible harm to the mother.

why it is never the man who has to own up to consequences? She didn't impregnant herself. Regardless, were is your compassion/empathy? If a pregnant woman comes to you in turmoil because she cannot afford a child, is not emotionally ready for a child, is not in a stable relationship, etc, are you just gonna say well you had sex, sucks to be you?

 

[def1]

why it is never the man who has to own up to consequences? She didn't impregnant herself. Regardless, were is your compassion/empathy? If a pregnant woman comes to you in turmoil because she cannot afford a child, is not emotionally ready for a child, is not in a stable relationship, etc, are you just gonna say well you had sex, sucks to be you?

Well considering the man has absolutely no say in the matter if he does want to keep the child, I don't exactly think its a fair question. Not to mention a man is forced to pay child support for 18 years regardless if he wanted the child or not.

As far as compassion. I do have compassion for the woman and the fetus. More so the fetus because it is innocent in the matter and did not ask to be brought into the equation.

I also don't like to absolve people of responsibility. This goes for guys and girls. If you dont want a baby, take the proper precautions and realize the risks you take. If you aren't willing to accept the consequences of those risks then you shouldn't be taking them.

I'd also advise the woman to put the child for adoption if she was in that situation. And the adoption system is not optimal, but Im sure most adopted children would admit they are glad to be alive.

 

[Druggernaut]

I'm not the only one to call it slavery. So being forced to work for an employer against your will an then not being compensated for your services isn't slavery? Furthermore, being subject to cruel punishment for doing nothing wrong isn't slavery?

You are against lawyers who sue doctors, but all of the sudden if it's a federal bureaucrat punishing a doctor we are the bad guys all of the sudden? Interesting.

I'm all for autonomy. Your hyperbole (or at least I hope it is, but you are carrying it across quite a few posts) goes too far, though. You aren't being forced to work, there is no single-payer system, you can opt not to take Medicare/Medicaid or any other insurer even though it might be difficult to support such a practice, and your claims of being imprisoned on a whim by the feds without a trial has no basis in reality. And considering that a physician making $150K is well below the mean, it's awfully difficult to claim slavery. That's up there in the top 5-10% of earnings.

As far as compassion. I do have compassion for the woman and the fetus. More so the fetus because it is innocent in the matter and did not ask to be brought into the equation.

I also don't like to absolve people of responsibility. This goes for guys and girls. If you dont want a baby, take the proper precautions and realize the risks you take. If you aren't willing to accept the consequences of those risks then you shouldn't be taking them.

I'd also advise the woman to put the child for adoption if she was in that situation. And the adoption system is not optimal, but Im sure most adopted children would admit they are glad to be alive.

It's unfortunate for the fetus, but it's also pretty unfortunate for the rest of society that has to pay for the child and deal with the societal repercussions of a child who would likely be raised poorly by someone who didn't want it. You phrase it like a punishment, and that sounds like a recipe for a terrible environment for the child, who will then grow into an adult and make the same mistakes. You can preach all you like about only taking risks for which you can manage the consequences, but our society is not prepared to actually deter this kind of behavior, even if you did outlaw abortions.

And I'd hardly call having to have an abortion a consequence-free thing. It's physically and emotionally unpleasant, and has potential long-term effects.

 

[mzarrowsmith]

1) Expert witness testimony falls under the scope of "medical practice". Their testimony is subject to peer review and fraudulent testimony can constitute malpractice itself resulting in revocation of license or financial liability.

2) Committee review by a board of health administrators, practicing physicians, and lawyers instead of jury by peers. Im sorry, but Hank from the supermarket is not a "peer" to a hospital, and it is a little absurd to sue the individual anyways. The shotgun approach to litigation needs to stop

3) Personally, I'd like to see precedent set for counter-suits against patients filing frivolous lawsuits....but that is just my vindictive side.

4) Another one that I may be alone on - no more monetary payouts. Or at least capped beyond tangible losses and do away with "emotional suffering" payouts. I find them insulting... If you get bad service at a restaurant, do they hand you a check? No... you get free desert. Give free healthcare at the expense of the hospital, maybe. It isnt bulletproof, but IMO we need to reduce the number of people chasing after payouts in order to get to real instances of malpractice.

If you get bad service at a restaurant, you don't (usually) die or suffer lifelong health-related complications. Medicine is different than other goods and services.

 

[SpecterGT260]

So its better to force a woman to carry a baby to term? Its not like we can toss it into an an incubator at 6 weeks.

I have seen so many women abuse substances to try to abort the fetus themselves.

Grover.... srsly..... srsly, grover.... srsly.

The ONE thing you really need to do is maintain your bearings in these threads. A typical progression in conversation with you is as follows:

Me: I like puppies
You: I also like puppies because [terrible reason to like puppies]
me: eh... I think that is a terrible reason to like puppies
You: OMG WHY DO YOU HATE PUPPIES!!??!?!111!



No, grovie, if you looked back you would see that I believe that women should have access to terminate pregnancies if that is what they want. I do believe that a physician should be able to opt out if it is in violation of his/her morals, and I do believe that equating a physician opting out of a morally dubious procedure to forcing a woman to do ANYTHING is intellectually dubious.

When you say " I don't like seeing kids be born into an environment where they are not wanted...or be subjected to a system when parents cant take care of their kids..." you are making a statement about the well being of the kids, not the mother. In the context of abortions, you imply that it is good that women have access to such procedures because it is bad for babies to be born unwanted. Ergo being aborted is better than being unwanted. I disagree with this statement. It is a terrible reason to "like puppies" if you will.

Now, your emotionally charged response about women using drugs to abort: THAT is a good reason to "like puppies". You make it about wellbeing of the mother. I still think offering abortions in order to protect women from irresponsible damaging behavior is just chalk full of ethical and moral dilemmas (I dont think it is the job of physicians to babysit the public or otherwise subvert Darwin's master plan) but at least it doesnt attempt to imply that allowing abortions is in ANY way a positive thing for the fetus in question. That is bizzaro-world fox news statement (if you are unfamiliar with bizzaro world, just think a universe in which opposites happen. i.e. fox news logic but supporting abortion). Abortion is inherently a selfish act. I pass no judgement on it in either direction with this statement, but call it what it is. It isnt for the benefit of a child that would otherwise be brought into the world unwanted or dependent on the system. Hence why I mentioned asking someone who was adopted if they would rather be aborted.

With options like those, I wonder why so many chose to stay slaves..

You.... you know I was being facetious right? Pre med 2014 is "speshul".

 

[SpecterGT260]

If you get bad service at a restaurant, you don't (usually) die or suffer lifelong health-related complications. Medicine is different than other goods and services.

Which is why I didnt suggest we give them dessert Dont bother nitpicking metaphors. There is no perfect metaphor, so worrying about the semantics is pointless.

Healthcare is only different because you deem it so. The chance for life or death is not unique to medicine, nor does it somehow necessitate monetary rewards. When exactly do I get to start suing fire departments when they dont save my dog/gramda (the two least likely to escape a blaze, I suspect)? Give me a logical progression which says that potential to die/suffer means that money is the only way to make it better. There is none. None. That is a convention that we have adopted and IMO it created a problem: people are filing frivolous suits in the interest of cashing in. The problem needs to be fixed, and I propose rather than monetary awards which are the source of the problem, we change payouts to free service for that problem. In anything else, if you screw it up you fix it for free. I am not calling it perfect or without faults, but it WILL stop the ridiculous suits in a hurry thereby fixing the mentioned fault. But claiming it is "inherently different" is opinion alone, and therefore not "inherent" in any way, shape, or form.

 

[PikminOC]

Right, maintain my bearings like you always do.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Right, maintain my bearings like you always do.

Precisely. And until you find examples where I lose the context of a thread I am ignoring your sarcasm. 👍

Just because we disagree or you dont find me entirely pleasant doesnt mean that I am forgetting context..... so.... you basically just posted "I know you are but what am I" 🙄

the irritating thing is that you are grabbing 1 word or phrase out of an entire post and spitting out a kneejerk emotionally charged response to something that WAS NOT SAID. There is no room for conversation or discussion there other than to tell you to go back and read, as your statement is just completely invalid. You are just overly eager to jump on something we disagree on to the point that you completely lose any sense of where I actually stand on the matter.

 

[jl lin]

You're not being forced to do anything. If you don't like the new regulations go find another career.

Wow. Really? After all the time and energy and money involved, that's the position to take?

Talk about

 

[SpecterGT260]

Wow. Really? After all the time and energy and money involved, that's the position to take?

Talk about

you realize that the person he was responding to is equating the practice of medicine to slavery right?

 

[music2doc]

you realize that the person he was responding to is equating the practice of medicine to slavery right?

Before Mr. [I hope] Hyperbole spoke up, a more moderate form of his position might have actually been tenable but I don't think I'd want to even consider mentioning Obamacare and physician autonomy as a topic of discussion at this point....

 

[jl lin]

I'm all for autonomy. Your hyperbole (or at least I hope it is, but you are carrying it across quite a few posts) goes too far, though. You aren't being forced to work, there is no single-payer system, you can opt not to take Medicare/Medicaid or any other insurer even though it might be difficult to support such a practice, and your claims of being imprisoned on a whim by the feds without a trial has no basis in reality. And considering that a physician making $150K is well below the mean, it's awfully difficult to claim slavery. That's up there in the top 5-10% of earnings.



It's unfortunate for the fetus, but it's also pretty unfortunate for the rest of society that has to pay for the child and deal with the societal repercussions of a child who would likely be raised poorly by someone who didn't want it. You phrase it like a punishment, and that sounds like a recipe for a terrible environment for the child, who will then grow into an adult and make the same mistakes. You can preach all you like about only taking risks for which you can manage the consequences, but our society is not prepared to actually deter this kind of behavior, even if you did outlaw abortions.

And I'd hardly call having to have an abortion a consequence-free thing. It's physically and emotionally unpleasant, and has potential long-term effects.

It may come down to being made to take a certain percentage of such patients. Give it time.


About the other thing, haven't you heard? A good number of folks do want to adopt babies--so much so that they are often forced to go outside the US to do so.

Secondly AoD also works as a device to absolve paternal responsibility for the yet unborn.

Making people to be responsible for their actions? Uh, the only person often having to deal with the situation is the mother or society somehow. But we are our brothers' keepers to some degree, anyway.
What should have changed? Men stepping up and taking responsibility for their actions in terms of financial and other kinds of support is what needed to change. But it's a lot easier to wave some bucks around and have the poor mom go through the nasty procedure. Many women have trouble dealing with abortion, even delayed responses. Cutting the male counterpart out was a bad idea--using the excuse of a child being carried in the female body. That was lame.

And then you have these other women that are so caught up in SA, they wouldn't know or even care if they were even pregnant or carrying a chipmunk in their wombs. There's no easy fix for this social problem, but I don't see that abortion has done that much to stop it. It's only fostered counterproductive mentalities in by view.


What the heck does this have to do with the thread or anything tangentially related to it? People are not going to agree on abortion; you can take that to the bank.

 

[pre med 2014]

You're not being forced to do anything. If you don't like the new regulations go find another career.

You are a true statist... with that definition of force.

 

[pre med 2014]

you realize that the person he was responding to is equating the practice of medicine to slavery right?

Forced labor without compensation and no avenue to defend yourself against draconian punishment from said employer?

You're right Specter. It's not slavery.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Forced labor without compensation and no avenue to defend yourself against draconian punishment from said employer?

You're right Specter. It's not slavery.

You aren't forced to labor. You can stop. Nobody is going to whip you or anything. Your comparison us simply invalid.

The last part..... that doesn't even approach happening even in your twisted pov 😕

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Forced labor without compensation and no avenue to defend yourself against draconian punishment from said employer?

You're right Specter. It's not slavery.

you're a fcking derp. that's all i came here to say.

 

[PikminOC]

Precisely. And until you find examples where I lose the context of a thread I am ignoring your sarcasm. 👍

Just because we disagree or you dont find me entirely pleasant doesnt mean that I am forgetting context..... so.... you basically just posted "I know you are but what am I" 🙄

the irritating thing is that you are grabbing 1 word or phrase out of an entire post and spitting out a kneejerk emotionally charged response to something that WAS NOT SAID. There is no room for conversation or discussion there other than to tell you to go back and read, as your statement is just completely invalid. You are just overly eager to jump on something we disagree on to the point that you completely lose any sense of where I actually stand on the matter.

Not everything I post revolves around you. Sheesh.

 

[music2doc]

Forced labor without compensation and no avenue to defend yourself against draconian punishment from said employer?

You're right Specter. It's not slavery.

How is it forced? You can always quit. Honestly, if you didn't take such an extreme stance with such a poor analogy, your argument might have some weight but as stated you just look like a giant *****. Think this through before responding further b/c as of now, you're just making yourself look bad and no one is going to try and rescue you at this point....

 

[SpecterGT260]

Not everything I post revolves around you. Sheesh.

nor did I even imply as much. My posts were only about the things you are posting directly to me.

Try to keep up, grovie. We were getting along so well.... But remember, this is you reacting only to the fact that I disagree with only one part of something you said. You aren't even attempting to address the other points I made or do anything which would resemble furthering or resolving that conversation. You are, instead, being..... what's our favorite word again? 😉

 

[PikminOC]

communicate thru PM from now on so we dont mess up the thread

 

[SpecterGT260]

um.... no? 99% of what I am saying is directly related to the thread, with a dash of "why the hell are you trying to derail it" sprinkled in for flavor.

I disagreed with your statement that "abortion should be allowed because as a doc I hate seeing babies born who are unwanted", not on the basis that I think that abortion should be outlawed, but on the basis that you imply that being adopted is somehow worse than death (or never living, depending on your own personal take).

That is on topic and from only a few posts back. Your turn: ready set go

 

[Druggernaut]

It may come down to being made to take a certain percentage of such patients. Give it time.

It may come to that, but it hasn't yet, which makes it an invalid argument for that other poster.

About the other thing, haven't you heard? A good number of folks do want to adopt babies--so much so that they are often forced to go outside the US to do so.

Secondly AoD also works as a device to absolve paternal responsibility for the yet unborn.

Making people to be responsible for their actions? Uh, the only person often having to deal with the situation is the mother or society somehow. But we are our brothers' keepers to some degree, anyway.
What should have changed? Men stepping up and taking responsibility for their actions in terms of financial and other kinds of support is what needed to change. But it's a lot easier to wave some bucks around and have the poor mom go through the nasty procedure. Many women have trouble dealing with abortion, even delayed responses. Cutting the male counterpart out was a bad idea--using the excuse of a child being carried in the female body. That was lame.

And then you have these other women that are so caught up in SA, they wouldn't know or even care if they were even pregnant or carrying a chipmunk in their wombs. There's no easy fix for this social problem, but I don't see that abortion has done that much to stop it. It's only fostered counterproductive mentalities in by view.


What the heck does this have to do with the thread or anything tangentially related to it? People are not going to agree on abortion; you can take that to the bank.

I almost finished a fairly lengthy response to this, but then I realized that it was never my intent to argue for or against abortion, so I'll just say that I think you're either reading too much into what I said or misunderstanding. I just wanted to point out that it's not a decision free of consequences, and that the mentality of punishing people by making them care for children is not good for anyone.

But the original post was about abortion. I'd say that's more than tangentially related to it. His initial question was answered (the interviewer was wrong), so the thread has already served its purpose. Who cares where it goes from here?

Forced labor without compensation and no avenue to defend yourself against draconian punishment from said employer?

You're right Specter. It's not slavery.

You've been challenged on this point a few times now. Please provide some sort of backing, because it seems completely fabricated.

 

[PikminOC]

It may come down to being made to take a certain percentage of such patients. Give it time.


About the other thing, haven't you heard? A good number of folks do want to adopt babies--so much so that they are often forced to go outside the US to do so.

Secondly AoD also works as a device to absolve paternal responsibility for the yet unborn.

Making people to be responsible for their actions? Uh, the only person often having to deal with the situation is the mother or society somehow. But we are our brothers' keepers to some degree, anyway.
What should have changed? Men stepping up and taking responsibility for their actions in terms of financial and other kinds of support is what needed to change. But it's a lot easier to wave some bucks around and have the poor mom go through the nasty procedure. Many women have trouble dealing with abortion, even delayed responses. Cutting the male counterpart out was a bad idea--using the excuse of a child being carried in the female body. That was lame.

And then you have these other women that are so caught up in SA, they wouldn't know or even care if they were even pregnant or carrying a chipmunk in their wombs. There's no easy fix for this social problem, but I don't see that abortion has done that much to stop it. It's only fostered counterproductive mentalities in by view.


What the heck does this have to do with the thread or anything tangentially related to it? People are not going to agree on abortion; you can take that to the bank.

The red tape involved with getting a kid from America is what dissuades people from getting one in America.

 

[SilverCat]

Don't worry about that interviewer MedPr; this is the same one who tried to tell me that 6 months is the average wait time to see a physician in this country.

 

[mapandterritory]

Gotcha. Just to clarify one thing, short of rape those women are very unlikely to get pregnant anyways. What do you think the major manifestation is? Anxiety during preggers? Nope. Sexual dysfunction 👍 if you have a legitimate phobia of that you are likely not getting freaky very often and if you do you have many layers of protection and failsafes.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

Agreed, but shouldn't that seem a bit obvious? 😀

 

[SpecterGT260]

Agreed, but shouldn't that seem a bit obvious? 😀

I thought so, but it was presented as an argument supporting the idea of patient harm.

 

[pre med 2014]

You've been challenged on this point a few times now. Please provide some sort of backing, because it seems completely fabricated.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/23/the-right-not-to-work-for-obamacare/