Fuzzy Posted April 3, 2010 Share Posted April 3, 2010 First of all this discussion is not about Obama. Its about the health care reform and whether this doctor has crossed the line denying people who "voted for Obama" due to his distaste in the health care reform. On the other hand, does he have the right to turn away people based on their political views as a private doctor? Personally i respect his right, but only because i know he won't stay in business long with his political view. I don't know if its greed or just his negative view on the health care reform, but someone like that is only making his life harder. Opening himself up to protests, financial difficulties, employment losses, and reputation damage. I don't think after this guy losses his business that he will be able to find work at a local hospital or clinic because most people aren't really going to trust him. Would you want a doctor to perform his duties on you based on what your political views are? Especially when it involves your urinary system? I can already see the joke spewing forth. Two men walk into a Urologist's office, both complaining of an UTI. First guy walks into the room and doctor notices his "Vote for McCain" shirt, he gives the man some antibotics and send him on his way. The second walks in wearing a "Vote for Obama" shirt, the doctor sits him on the bench, takes an elongated Qtip with alcohol on it and jabs it into the man's penis, then takes another Qtip puts a cream on it and jabs it again into the man's penis and tells him the pain should go away in a few days and sends him away. Link to comment
carlfense Posted April 4, 2010 Share Posted April 4, 2010 I believe the only obligation the doctor has is that if he refuses to treat the patient he must tell them where they CAN be treated. Link to comment
SOCALHUSKER Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Why should a doctor not have the same right to treat/choose a patient that the patients have to see/choose a doctor? It's completely absurd for a person to somehow believe that they have the right to force somebody to give them a good or service. As if rights are somehow positive, in the sense that someone must provide one something, without regard for that person's rights, instead of negative, which requires one to merely refrain from infringing upon another individual. I'd say what's next, but in my eyes the bar has already been set. If becoming a doctor somehow precludes someone from their own rights and choices, it won't be long until we see a decrease in the number of doctors, an increase in prices, a drastic decline in the quality of care and plenty of new legislation to try and prevent all three. Bank that!! Link to comment
knapplc Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Out of curiosity, how does he know who voted for Obama? Link to comment
SOCALHUSKER Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Out of curiosity, how does he know who voted for Obama? He doesn't. He just said that he wanted his feeligns out there. Nothign wrong with that. Link to comment
knapplc Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Out of curiosity, how does he know who voted for Obama? He doesn't. He just said that he wanted his feeligns out there. Nothign wrong with that. Yeah, I agree, and I think he has the right to refuse service to Obama voters, but I wonder how he would know. If he's just trying to get his feelings known, this reminds me of those folks who threaten to move to Canada if Candidate X gets elected. They never do. Link to comment
sarge87 Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 First, the doctor isn't refusing service to anyone. He was putting his political opinion for all to see, which is his right. Second, if anyone who happens to see the sign and they decide to go somewhere else, it is their decision. Otherwise, he will provide his services as he always has. He isn't going to ask political affiliation or who they voted for. Third, he put the message out because he was tired of getting low balled by Medicare, and he knows it will be worse now that the feds have control of the insurance mandates. Link to comment
SOCALHUSKER Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 I see five people voted that he crossed the line and is segregating patients, I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion? Link to comment
carlfense Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 I see five people voted that he crossed the line and is segregating patients, I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion? I'd guess that some people think that it might violate the Hippocratic oath that the doctor swore to uphold. I think it's a close issue but I sided on the side that it's his right to choose who he wants as a patient so long as the patient has other treatment options. Link to comment
sarge87 Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 I see five people voted that he crossed the line and is segregating patients, I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion? Didn't you hear SOCAL? A doctor's labor is now property of the state. He abdicated all rights and provisions allowed normal citizens since he became a doctor. Link to comment
carlfense Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 I see five people voted that he crossed the line and is segregating patients, I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion? Didn't you hear SOCAL? A doctor's labor is now property of the state. He abdicated all rights and provisions allowed normal citizens since he became a doctor. When did Glenn Beck join us? Yikes. Link to comment
SOCALHUSKER Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 I see five people voted that he crossed the line and is segregating patients, I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion? Didn't you hear SOCAL? A doctor's labor is now property of the state. He abdicated all rights and provisions allowed normal citizens since he became a doctor. That's what I figured, but I thought if I mentioned it all hell might break loose!! Link to comment
Enhance Posted April 8, 2010 Share Posted April 8, 2010 He can who choose he wants to treat. However, if he refuses to treat someone to their face, he damn well better inform them of some place they can go. Link to comment
sarge87 Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 He can who choose he wants to treat. However, if he refuses to treat someone to their face, he damn well better inform them of some place they can go. Are they too damn dumb to use the Yellow Pages? Link to comment
carlfense Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 He can who choose he wants to treat. However, if he refuses to treat someone to their face, he damn well better inform them of some place they can go. Are they too damn dumb to use the Yellow Pages? The AMA frowns on doctors turning patients away if there aren't other reasonable options. Such as a hypothetical urologist in Valentine, NE. There wouldn't be many options for those patients would there? Odds are it's different in FL but that's the underlying issue. Link to comment
Recommended Posts