Month: July 2008

Okay, as Denialism’s lawyer, let me get to the issue of the rose tattoo.

A medical procedure is a battery. Patients consent to it, thus allowing the doctor to engage in even invasive touching without liability for the battery. The scope of consent is key, however. Many individuals have a rough sense of consent; they think that if consent is given to one thing, anything goes. But, the law takes a much more nuanced approach to consent. Thus, a patient does not consent to all forms of touching, just ones that are consistent with the procedure authorized.

Was applying a rose tattoo within the scope of consent? Many people get off track by focusing on the temporary nature of the tattoo, but why should that fact matter? The key here is whether the touching itself is authorized. Whether the touching caused a permanent mark goes to damages, not to the consent issue.

It is clear that applying the tattoo, temporary or permanent, is a battery. And a doctor engaged in such pranks can end up paying through the nose for it. Take the facts discussed in Woo v. Fireman’s, where Dr. Woo (real name) applied temporary teeth to his patient (who was also an employee) while under sedation. The teeth were boar tusks, and thus made the patient/employee look very funny. Dr. Woo took pictures, removed the teeth, finished the procedure, and then showed the pictures to the patient/employee. The touching did not physically harm her, and the teeth were temporary. When presented with the pictures, she never came back to work again.

Dr. Woo settled the case for $250,000. That might seem unreasonable, but from the patient’s perspective, there is an incredible amount of anxiety surrounding general anesthesia. Apart from the medical risks, there is the fear that while unconscious, anyone could do anything to you, and you may never learn what happened. Therefore, any deviance in that type of situation can cause years of suffering and anxiety.

The tattoo was a bad idea. They should have known better. And if a patient can recover $250,000 for temporary false teeth, don’t you think a similar or larger award could be appropriate for a below-the-underwear-line application of a temporary tattoo?

My Scibling DrugMonkey brought up a half-valid point. The half that was valid was that none of the medical bloggers spoke out about the surgeon who assaulted a patient. The half that was insane was where this is used as further evidence that doctors are arrogant pricks. Based on this comment and those of the commenters on my blog, some further clarification is needed.

I can’t speak for other doctor-bloggers, but the story of the surgeon who tattooed a patient wasn’t that interesting to me because of its isolated nature. When looking at antivaccine claims, altmed claims, and all manner of woo, we look for patterns of thought and behavior not in individuals but in society and in movements. If it were found that there were a true sub-culture of surgeons doing this to patients, I would probably rant for days about it.

That being said, there are certain aspects of the incident which seem to confuse our readers.
Continue reading “Scene II, in which I clarify my previous statement”

Who wrote this?

As someone who spends a substantial portion of his professional time teaching medical students, I can tell you that this kind of attitude-that physicians are gods, not mere mortals, and wield power over other human beings that no one dare question-is inculcated in them from the very beginning of medical training. It is an ugly secret of our medical training system. And the more prestigious the institutions where physicians receive their training, the more overweening is this attitude.

Anything that a physician calls a “joke” or “for the patient’s benefit” simply is that, and how dare anyone question that judgment!

Surgeons are the worst, they cut people’s fucking asses open with sharp knives, and they are basically used to functioning as dictators in the operating room. These leads to the development of attitudes which makes perfect sense in light of the practical demands of surgery. But they do not work well in other areas of life. Put a surgeon in charge of any enterprise that requires leadership through persuasion or consensus, and you are totally fucking fucked.

I know, you guys are saying, Gary Null, or Joe Mercola, or maybe the Health Ranger Mike Adams. But you would be wrong, actually this snarling little piece of anti-doctor slander came from someone within our own community. Not only that, it came from someone who teaches medical students at a major academic university. This is, of course, PhysioProf. Now, if anyone knows me, and what I write about, what I really care about is standards for arguments. As a member of the scienceblogs community, it is understandably upsetting to see a evidence-free rant, based on bigotry, from a scibling that tars a group of people that I know to be some of the most caring, the most thoughtful, intellectual, careful and conscientious people I have ever had the pleasure of working with.

What to do about this I wonder? What solution is there to this problem of such a fool in our midst, spouting such hate and nonsense at others? What can we do about someone who holds medical students and doctors in such contempt, when he himself teaches them daily?
Continue reading “Why am I hearing this nonsense from a scienceblogger?”

Our Scibling PhysioProf has launched the opening salvo in what may turn out to be a rather bloody flame war. In the interest of actually gaining something from this other than venting my own anger and frustration, I will beg your indulgence here as I explain why my colleague is so utterly misguided.
Continue reading “Scene I, in which I defend my profession”