Thanks, and you’re right. It was snark - but I am aware people like me are privileged, and one of our privileges is that cops tend to assume we aren’t drug mules.
2 Likes
Well, hang in there, man. Fink hasn’t laid on the slavery rant yet.
Oh good. Torture is a violation of America’s best practices, too. Good thing we’ve got that worked out.
I’m not sure what your point is, now? I’ve already pointed out that vaginal examinations performed without consent on anaesthetised patients is frowned on; that it isn’t widespread enough that I’ve had experience of it in 25 years of practice in 3 different countries, most of that in operating theatres; that I personally believe it to be very wrong and would put a stop to it if it came to my attention.
Representative experience from my current jurisdiction is here (link to a pdf). The small numbers of cases where there were examinations performed without consent led to adverse incident reports and the process was further tightened up to reduce the odds of a repeat.
Performing a procedure on someone without their consent is an assault. I’m committed to that principle, as are the vast majority of medical practitioners. I’m not sure what else you want? I can’t do anything about the USA —just point out that they are apparently out of step with the rest of the anglophone world in this area.
I assume his point* is that the US has rules against torture and yet it still happens. You say that the UK has had “best practice guidelines” forbidding pelvic exams without consent since before you qualified 25 years ago. But I can point to a 2003 survey done at University of Bristol that shows many students not getting consent before performing these exams (I linked to it earlier.). So, despite your “best practice guidelines”, it still apparently happens.
When the 2003 survey of Philadelphia medical students was published showing that pelvic exams were happening without consent, both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Association of American Medical Colleges responded by saying that consent should be obtained ( https://web.archive.org/web/20061211100826/http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/press_releases/nr04-25-03.cfm and https://web.archive.org/web/20030623113147/http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/pressrel/2003/030612.htm ). But the 2009 CBSnews article that I linked to earlier indicates that medical schools are not necessarily telling patients that their “treatment could include a pelvic exam for educational purposes”.
Maybe actual research showing that this practice is not happening? An explanation as to why you think this does not happen in the UK when the study done at University of Bristol Medical School indicates that it does?
Don’t forget about Canada! They only changed their guidelines in 2010: Consent policy for pelvic exams by medical students flawed, legals analysts say and Time to end pelvic exams done without consent - The Globe and Mail
Look, no one is accusing you of performing pelvic exams without consent or approving of the practice. But it is hard to understand how you can declare that it does not happen despite the evidence.
(By the way, your link leads to a “forbidden” page for me, so I cannot read it.)
More information about pelvic exams without consent that includes lots of citations: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=fac_pubs (pdf)
* @Boundegar: I apologize for trying to speak for you again, but it seemed like you were saying part of what I already wanted to say.
Pretty sure I said:[quote=“aeon, post:80, topic:13894”]
Not saying it has never happened or still can’t.
[/quote]
…rather than trying to cover up the problem or deny it ever happens. The papers we both linked to show that when audited the practice still occurs —albeit rather less commonly here in NZ and with adverse incident reporting as a direct consequence of the events that did. (And sorry if my link is unavailable —it works for me still. IP filtering maybe?). The fact that practice is being audited and published shows that investigators are concerned enough to work on this; that there is a wish by the profession to educate practitioners that lapses occur; and a desire to ensure that it doesn’t happen at all. More worrying still would be a lack of official requirement for consent to be obtained and no formal published audit data at all —which would leave you to link to individual anecdotes on blogs or news websites and indicate a lack of engagement by doctors.
I did however offer evidence of rarity —and of commitment from myself and a large body of my profession to proper consent processes, at least in jurisdictions where I’ve practiced medicine. I wasn’t aware that Canada was with the US in lagging so far behind, so thank you for that. 
In particular there aren’t rows of medical students queuing up to digitally rape anaesthetised women in hospitals here in New Zealand. Consent —and women’s rights in particular— are taken very seriously here after Herb Green’s “unfortunate experiment” from the 60’s and 70’s came to light and the findings of the subsequent [Cartwright Enquiry][1] were published.
(Edited for grammar, spelling)
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartwright_Inquiry
Yeah, I made it pretty clear that wasn’t the question I was asking nor that I thought what was done to this woman was acceptable.
However, when it comes to this crazy thing you may have heard of called “The Legal System,” whether or not something is just or humane is not the main issue at hand, while the legality is.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
