Women have reproductive duty, says 'rhythm' doctor

[Scone]

As far as I understood, this guy is employed in the public heath system? Terrible thing, did that make it into -let´s say- national news? Is there a discussion going on in NZ?

I'm not sure if he works in public health, exactly. The lines are fairly blurry here outside of hospitals. Most clinics are private, I'm not sure about the Wairau Community Clinic though. As for national news, yes, the link posted was for the New Zealand Herald, our national newspaper. Well. The most-national newspaper anyway, we don't actually have a national newspaper. And people were pretty upset about it. We're used to hearing stories like this from America and even occasionally Australia, but not from within NZ.

Something I think a lot of people missed in the article is that Dr. Lee knows the rhythm method is unreliable. From the article linked:

He acknowledged natural birth control was "not very reliable".

"That's the best thing about it. You can't choose it, you just have to be committed to it."

Yeah. Even for 16 year olds:

Lee also does not prescribe condoms, and encourages patients as young as 16 to use the rhythm method.

Teen pregnancy might be a girl's "destiny", he said, and it was certainly not as bad as same- sex marriage.

Yeah. He went there. :shock:

ETA: Forgot to mention that doctors are allowed to refuse things like BC because of their religious beliefs, but if they refuse to fill the prescription themselves they MUST refer the patient to someone who will. It sounds like this doctor refused to give the patient a referral until the patient fought for it, which is definitely not a good standard of care.

[happy atheist]

You need a prescription for condoms?

[uber frau]

No. I think that's a poor choice of words by the journo, "encourage" might have been better in the context.

[happy atheist]

No. I think that's a poor choice of words by the journo, "encourage" might have been better in the context.

Okay, that makes much more sense.

[lizziesmom]

She should have just gone to another Doctor. I"m siding with the doctor on this because its what he chooses, just like how a plastic surgeon would not choose to do lipo on someone 300 lbs overweight.

That sounds like an easy solution but it may be harder than you think. Perhaps this is the only one in the area? The only one covered by her health provider? There is a big difference between prescribing birth control and refusing to operate on someone 300 pounds overweight.

EDIT: I guess I should have read through the entire thread before responding to you. :feed-trolls:

[GeoBQn]

I don't think engineer5 is coming back . . .

[RachelB]

Lee also does not prescribe condoms, and encourages patients as young as 16 to use the rhythm method.

Teen pregnancy might be a girl's "destiny", he said, and it was certainly not as bad as same- sex marriage.

Fuck that destiny bullshit. I would wager he doesn't believe that teen parenthood is a boy's destiny, and a boy doesn't bear the physical risks of pregnancy and labor, anyhow.

I hate how all the exemptions doctors are granted from actually doing their jobs have to do with the reproductive health of women and/or gender and sexual minorities. I know this example comes from NZ, but US regulations don't allow a doctor who's religiously opposed to alcohol use to refuse to treat or refer a patient suffering from a condition related to alcohol use. I know, because I looked it up. (Mind you, I don't think someone should be allowed to refuse to treat or refer in that circumstance. But "conscience clauses" look like blatant and misogynist violations of the Establishment Clause to me.)

:disgust:

[micatite]

I'm not saying its the same, but you aren't going to die if you can't get your bc pills. Can you admit that? I'm just saying no one obligated to do what you want.

Where'd you get your medical degree with your specialties in gynecology and oncology? Do tell! Because, since I take those birth control pills to PREVENT @#$&-ING OVARIAN CANCER, of which I have a direct family history, I could very well die if I don't get my birth control pills!

That "doctor" can take his thoughts on what he perceives to be my reproductive duties and go pound sand. He's not my husband, my father, my confessor, my priest, or my God, no matter what he thinks.

[Mama Mia]

Okay, that makes much more sense.

I think I read that in one of these threads that in.New Zealand condoms are prescribed because then they are free (or practically free) through their public health system.

[2xx1xy1JD]

So just because you are a profession, you have to cater to anyone who asks?

If its life or death, then you probably do have a responsibility. Pill birth control isn't life or death. Why can't someone say no? Would you say yes as a plastic surgeon if a 17 year old came with her parents to get breast implants?

Thats why you should research someone before you spend money on them, that's the smart thing to do. Not everyone is going to prescribe you whatever you want because of objective and subject reasons (and that goes with every medical field.)

I'm only answering this because I can see this being a line that would be argued.

While FJ is not an advice site and nobody should rely on anything posted here, I'll mention that I am a lawyer and my husband is a doctor. We are therefore quite familiar with medical-legal issues in Canada, including things like refusal to treat.

Summary of basic obligations:

1. If you are on call at a hospital, you have an obligation to treat patients who come in, in accordance with the accepted standard of medical care, making referrals as warranted. A doctor cannot simply decide not to treat, or give advice/treatment that reflects his or her own values and not the accepted standard of medical care.

2. If you have an office practice, you can advise the public and other doctors what your scope of practice is. For example, my husband is a specialist who has decided to treat only adults, because pediatric issues are sometimes different. He's allowed to say, "sorry, I know your 15 yr old is over 6 ft and looks mature, but medical issues in this field are often different for children and teens. I can refer you to a pediatric specialist..." This would be done before a patient came in.

3. Referrals to others may be made if another doctor would be more qualified to deal with a particular issue.

4. It would be unethical to say that you are practicing in a certain area, if you do not plan to offer the usual range of services for that area for your own reasons and you fail to let your patients know that. For example, if my husband decided that pharmaceutical companies were evil and that he should cure people with natural methods only, he would need to be upfront about that and say, "I am a [name of subspecialty], who is concerned about overuse of medications. As a result, I have left the traditional practice of [subspecialty], and now restrict my practice to natural methods of disease management, including diet, exercise, etc." That way, someone would be very clear that they were seeing him for alternative or complementary treatments. It would be irresponsible for him to think "drug companies are evil", and then fail to prescribe drugs even though there is medical evidence and a standard of practice that says that these drugs should be prescribed to prevent the disease from progressing. So sure, he thinks that a gluten-free diet may help some folks get off a particular medication, but he can't use people as guinea pigs without their consent and fail to prescribe those meds.

[fakepigtails73]

No, I'm not saying that is messed up if she couldn't find out beforehand about the Doctor. But I doubt she did do her research and its not that big of a deal if it wasted an afternoon. There are far worst things in this world.

No, as you say it's "not that big of a deal" nor "the worst thing in the world" to have an afternoon wasted because of such dumbass doc. :geek:

BUT...It is seriously unprofessionnal to think of oneself as a serious ob-gyn and claim thatreproductive age women, patients of yours or not, have a "sacred duty to reproduce". :shifty-kitty:

It shows that this obgyn sees these women as "tummies and ovaries on legs" first and foremost instead of unique human beings. Women should have the freedom to either start a family very early in their late teens or early 20s, or other women can ask their ob-gyns as to the best contraceptive methods on the market because they want to wait until they're 25 and older before getting pregnant, or, get this, some women (like me!!) might want to stay child-free forever and have known so since their early 20s (hence the need for very safe contraceptive methods)...

Whatever choices women make re: their pregnancies or their not wanting one none of us like to be stuck in the office of a paternalist and condescending obgyn... :disgust:

To the writer of the post I quoted: it might not seem like the end of the world per se, but it's another episode of men trying to keep their control over women's bodies. To see it happening in a country like New Zealand where one doesn't see shit like this happening often (at least I didn't see much of that in NZ) is a reminder that in 2013 women shouldn't take rights to contraceptive use for granted, even in so-called "safe countries". :wtf:

[Anxious Girl]

If by reproductive duty he means to have a sometimes extremely painful period once a month untill I'm older, I agree. Oh, he means that once I'm out of public school to get hitched and have a brood. :angry-banghead: