3/4 of doctors believe in God...

[Trytostaydead]

Because a doctor is supposed to do what the patient wants, not what he wants. If I'm dying in agony of cancer, I don't want some "Good Christian" keeping me alive as long as possible in as much pain as possible because suffering is a virtue and giving me more pain meds violates his precious religious sensibilties. The fact that he thinks he's doing it "for his own good" won't make it hurt any less.

Assisted suicide is still illegal I think. Even then, there's the Hippocrate's Oath, I swore to Apollo dammit! But you can sign a DNR or go for Hospice care.

[Zero]

This is true, but if you were asked to perform a duty that went against something you felt very strongly, would you actually be able to? I mean, I think that if doctors were to try and force themselves to comitt to procedures that they weren't readily willing to do, the possibility of a botched procedure increases. It seems to me that it should be alright for a doctor to refuse a procedure, for the sake of his own freedoms, but it isn't at all right to force a larger population to adhere to your notions of right and wrong. I'm just a bit confused..

Ah, I see you still don't get it. It's apart of their fucking job. Doctors should know they might be asked to perform this type of duty when they agree to sign on. Refusing to perform this job is a negligence of duty. When someone signs on for -any- job, they're expected to be able to perform all functions of it that they are qualified for. If they have moral compunctions with parts of that job, then they shouldn't be doing it. This is not rocket science here.

And if the 55% figure is accurate, how many doctors might we lose if this were actually happening? It's not practical..

[Lord of the Abyss]

Assisted suicide is still illegal I think. Even then, there's the Hippocrate's Oath, I swore to Apollo dammit! But you can sign a DNR or go for Hospice care.

I never said anything about assisted suicide (although I support it). I'm talking about the sort of doctors who keep you alive far longer than you want to, and add restraints so you can't even pull the damned tubes out yourself.

This sort of thing is why my mother was glad she was in an HMO; they would never have spent the money necessary to support these people's beliefs. Sometimes even cheapness is a virtue.

[General Zod]

And if the 55% figure is accurate, how many doctors might we lose if this were actually happening? It's not practical..

While it might be that religion influences their practice to some degree, as has been stated we don't know exactly how it influences it. If it causes doctors to refuse treatments to a patient because they believe those treatments should not be performed, even though they're perfectly viable and effective, then those doctors need to find a new field.

So long as the duties the doctor is performing is not impeded by his religious beliefs, then there is no issue.

[Flagg]

This is true, but if you were asked to perform a duty that went against something you felt very strongly, would you actually be able to? I mean, I think that if doctors were to try and force themselves to comitt to procedures that they weren't readily willing to do, the possibility of a botched procedure increases. It seems to me that it should be alright for a doctor to refuse a procedure, for the sake of his own freedoms, but it isn't at all right to force a larger population to adhere to your notions of right and wrong. I'm just a bit confused..

Ah, I see you still don't get it. It's apart of their fucking job. Doctors should know they might be asked to perform this type of duty when they agree to sign on. Refusing to perform this job is a negligence of duty. When someone signs on for -any- job, they're expected to be able to perform all functions of it that they are qualified for. If they have moral compunctions with parts of that job, then they shouldn't be doing it. This is not rocket science here.

And if the 55% figure is accurate, how many doctors might we lose if this were actually happening? It's not practical..

My bullshit sense is tingling. What makes you think we would lose any doctors? Do you have some proof that these doctors would find some other profession and make far less money based on their religious convictions? And if the ones that are so fanatical in their religious beliefs would quit, would it really be all that bad??

[Lord of the Abyss]

And if the 55% figure is accurate, how many doctors might we lose if this were actually happening? It's not practical..

As a rule, better a shortage of doctors than bad doctors. Besides, a shortage will raise wages and cause an influx into the profession; hopefully a less irrational generation of doctors would be the result.

[Captain Cyran]

I'd say of that 55% maybe 10-15% actually let it affect them in a way that is negative to their practice. The rest are probably along the lines of "I'll pray for my patients" or "I think abortions are wrong so I don't work at an abortion clinic."

If 55% of doctors, hell if even 30% of doctors let their personal beliefs affect their practice negatively we would be hearing a lot more about it in the news.

[Zero]

I don't necessarily see this as true, if the only reason the doctors would be considered bad is because they had moral issues with certain aspects of the work. The shortage of healthcare professionals that could result might screw things up a lot more then some doctors refusing to do certain procedures...

[Firefox]

I don't necessarily see this as true, if the only reason the doctors would be considered bad is because they had moral issues with certain aspects of the work.

You don't consider it bad when doctors refuse to treat patients?

[General Zod]

I don't necessarily see this as true, if the only reason the doctors would be considered bad is because they had moral issues with certain aspects of the work.

Are you listening to what people are saying in this thread at all?

The shortage of healthcare professionals that could result might screw things up a lot more then some doctors refusing to do certain procedures...

Please provide concrete numbers of the amount of doctors that would actively refuse certain types of healthcare that their duties require they provide if the patient can show demonstrable need due to their moral conundrums. If you can't, then you're talking out your ass about the layoffs of such doctors being such a problem.

[Zero]

Please provide concrete numbers of the amount of doctors that would actively refuse certain types of healthcare that their duties require they provide if the patient can show demonstrable need due to their moral conundrums. If you can't, then you're talking out your ass about the layoffs of such doctors being such a problem.

I should have said that while I was still debating. No, you're probably right. I'm not trying to debate any point anymore. I've already conceded. I'm just unsure of certian things.

[Lord of the Abyss]

A bad doctor can hurt a a lot of people very badly, and I find it hard to believe that 55% of all doctors are such religious fanatics that they can't be pressured to behave themselves.

And if they are that far out of it, they need to be immediately kicked out of medicine - and probably kept away from sharp objects as well.

Hell, if there really was a severe doctor shortage we could import them from saner countries; it's not like America is some isolated Lost Continent.

[Firefox]

I should have said that while I was still debating. No, you're probably right. I'm not trying to debate any point anymore. I've already conceded. I'm just unsure of certian things.

Uncertain about what? How many doctors would be booted if medical providers and politicians came to their senses and made legal their demand that medical care be provided to patients who need it, regardless of personal beliefs? You just admitted that you don't know, and won't even back up your previous claims that "if 55% figure is true, then we're in deep shit!".

Put up, or shut up.

[Darth Wong]

This is true, but if you were asked to perform a duty that went against something you felt very strongly, would you actually be able to?

This is like a Christian joining the Army and then deciding later that the actual duties of a soldier go against his beliefs. Maybe he should have fucking thought of that before joining.

[Trytostaydead]

This is true, but if you were asked to perform a duty that went against something you felt very strongly, would you actually be able to?

This is like a Christian joining the Army and then deciding later that the actual duties of a soldier go against his beliefs. Maybe he should have fucking thought of that before joining.

Joining the Army to fight or what? As in the person objects to the whole machination of the military or decides he doesn't want to be a frontline soldier but support staff?

Because if it's the latter you're alluding to, there are certain ethical lines a doctor can draw for his or herself as well.

[Darth Wong]

This is true, but if you were asked to perform a duty that went against something you felt very strongly, would you actually be able to?

This is like a Christian joining the Army and then deciding later that the actual duties of a soldier go against his beliefs. Maybe he should have fucking thought of that before joining.

Joining the Army to fight or what? As in the person objects to the whole machination of the military or decides he doesn't want to be a frontline soldier but support staff?

Because if it's the latter you're alluding to, there are certain ethical lines a doctor can draw for his or herself as well.

Yeah, he could have become a dentist. But if he chose to go into a particular discipline where some of the work goes against his principles, that's too fucking bad.

[The Nomad]

Yeah, he could have become a dentist.

Yeah, we rule.
That's part of the why I didn't chose becoming a doctor. You're less likely to see your patient die or confronted to crucial dilemma or bear the responsibility of life-or-death decisions. Dentists may complain about their patients screaming in pain too often, yes, but it's the lesser of two evils. Unless you kill them yourself to silence them.

[Trytostaydead]

Yeah, he could have become a dentist.

Yeah, we rule.
That's part of the why I didn't chose becoming a doctor. You're less likely to see your patient die or confronted to crucial dilemma or bear the responsibility of life-or-death decisions. Dentists may complain about their patients screaming in pain too often, yes, but it's the lesser of two evils. Unless you kill them yourself to silence them.

Well, dental student girls are certainly prettier than med student chicks, let me tell you!!!

[The Nomad]

Well, dental student girls are certainly prettier than med student chicks, let me tell you!!!

Well, I don't care since I have my pretty pharma student girl .
This conversation reminds me of the girl that ranked 2nd at the entrance exam. Hot blonde. She chose med .

[PainRack]

The problem is, can you automatically link religious motivation to non-professionalism?

As I and others have repeatedly said, yes, if it affects how they do their jobs. Again, if "religious beliefs influence how they practice medicine", they are by definition compremising medical standards.

If it does not affect how they do their job, I don't care. If they want to be stupid in their personal lives, it's not my business. When they impose that stupidity on me then, yes, it is my business.

No it isn't. "influence how they practice medicine" is so extremely vague that it does not automatically mean that a doctor doesn't look to the AMA and the hospital/clinic legal policy first before looking to the Bible for guidance.

There are plenty of christians who practise medicine. When they say their religion affects what they will do, how do you know this means that they won't work in a pediatric hospital, even though they know they're excellent at this, because if they do that, they may have to conduct abortions? Alternatively, doctors may choose not to work in states that allow assisted sucide, because their religion affects what they are willing to do in such cases. All the above are examples of religious beliefs affecting the way they practice medicine, but it in NO WAY affects their standard of care.

I never said anything about assisted suicide (although I support it). I'm talking about the sort of doctors who keep you alive far longer than you want to, and add restraints so you can't even pull the damned tubes out yourself.

Check. It is against the law to let you kill yourself, aka, any doctor that follows his moral views on letting the patient die in peace WOULD be neglient in this regard.

As a rule, better a shortage of doctors than bad doctors. Besides, a shortage will raise wages and cause an influx into the profession; hopefully a less irrational generation of doctors would be the result.

Since when has the law of supply and demand ever really applied to the medical field?

[mr friendly guy]

When they say their religion affects what they will do, how do you know this means that they won't work in a pediatric hospital, even though they know they're excellent at this, because if they do that, they may have to conduct abortions?

Nitpick, that's Obstetrics which deals with abortions. Paediatrics deals with kiddies, ie they have already been born. Otherwise I await LOA reply.