delchrys:
Sweet, my chance to debate a mental giant. I too enjoy a good sparring match, though I don't usually fight unarmed men. I wasn't making lawyer comments aimed at you. I was just saying that case law shouldn't affect my practice. Since you bit, though, let me say that in as much as I am the "doc, and all mere mortals aught to shut their mouths, avert their eyes, and beg for mercy" you lawyers think you are the holy defenders of the unclean masses b/c they're too stupid to take care of themselves.
As for the foley, perhaps you should pick-up an SAT practice book and study analigies. A foley is more invasive than and can cause much more damage than a bimanual and yet not specifically consented too. And yes, you ignorant ambulance chaser, sometimes students do attempt the foley and if they can't get it done it does get passed around the damn room until someone does it right.
The need for a preop pelvic by the attending is not questionable. Man, are you ever ignorant. Things can change and this exam may even avert a surgery. That's like saying I shouldn't look in someones mouth before I start cutting their neck to access their mandible. I'd say it's malpractice not to examine every patient before you cut. Any other opinion shows glaring ignorance.
Despite your invitation, I will not blow you, though I do think you are incapable of expressing a cogent view on patients' rights. In fact, your opinions prove the need for malpractice juries made of at least a simple majority of physicians. Your thoughts may seem great in an ecceteric world of tree-hugging and happiness, but reality has to step in somewhere. Letting students and residents do a simple PHYSICAL EXAM is no big deal. Okay, I'll agree it would be nice to tell the women it will happen, but if that doens't happend so what? Everyone in that room was going to see her damn vulva and have their hands either in the vagina or the abdomen anyways so she hasn't lost any privacy.
Patients do have rights? This phrase is thrown around by every damn idiot, like yourself, but where does it come from? Hey Mr. Lawyer, does the Bill of Rights say "Medical students shall not examine a patients vagina prior to vaginal surgery?" This patient's have rights bull**** camefrom lawyers who coinded the phrase and then conveniently used it where ever they could make a buck. Healthcare isn't even a right. Sure medicine needs checks and balances to prevent unethical behavior, but lawyers make it absurd. Funny that lawyers are the only profession that truly self-police. State medical boards bow to lawyers, yet who polices the lawyers? Other lawyers?
Yes, I agree gynecology is a sensitive discipline and a woman's privacy and dignity must be respected. Pull out your hooked on phonics and reread my last paragraph, slowly. Get an adult to help you if you can't understand what I said. However, having medical students do a legitimate exam, even if the value is purely educational, is far from a violation of privacy and dignity. Again, if you come to a teaching hospital you have to pay for your benefit of reduced cost or advanced care somehow. That payment may just be in the fact that a student or resident is going to do a redundant exam on you. This same situation arises in our clinics and no one cries about it. The intern does the pelvic, if they have a question the upper level and the attending redo the exam. The pt probably wasn't told on arrival of this possibility but no one screams about it. I find that lawyers like yourself make a stink when they smell money. Good lawyers do their job without championing nonexistant causes and trying to legislate from the bench.
Finally, the average person does know the difference in private and teaching hospitals. The may not know what the phrase teaching hospital means, but in this town they know that unisured/poor people go to my hospital and other people go to the private hosptial, and they know that my hospital has students and residents. Sorry, that's reality.