PDA

View Full Version : Pediatricians have a new mission: Fight ‘homophobia’



Rockntractor
06-24-2013, 09:48 PM
By Cheryl Wetzstein

-

The Washington Times

Monday, June 24, 2013
In its first sexual-orientation policy update in nearly a decade, the nation’s largest pediatricians group said its members should do more to fight “heterosexism” and “homophobia,” as well as step up their care of teens with same-sex attractions.

“Sexual-minority youth should not be considered abnormal,” the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) said in its new materials on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) youths, released Monday.

The policy statement and technical report — which updates a 2004 policy — is nonbinding but recommends that pediatricians create offices that are “teen-friendly and welcoming to all adolescents, regardless of sexual orientation and behavior.”

Doctors can signal their openness to LGBTQ youths by putting out brochures with pictures of “both same- and opposite-gender couples” or posting a “rainbow” decal on an office door or bulletin board. The report also suggests that medical questionnaires be changed to be gender-neutral, and that staff be trained to not ask a boy about his girlfriend, but to ask him to “tell me about your partner” instead.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/24/pediatricians-set-new-policy-on-sexual-minorities/#ixzz2XBTyceCo
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
http://i.imgur.com/kUMCkvW.jpg

txradioguy
06-25-2013, 03:13 AM
Yeah...because that's what doctors should be doing. :rolleyes:

Odysseus
06-25-2013, 11:07 AM
If a pediatrician considers this to be pernicious nonsense and refuses to go along with it, how long do you think it will take for the AAP to sanction him?

Generation Why?
06-25-2013, 11:38 AM
This is ridiculous. That is all.

TVDOC
06-25-2013, 11:53 AM
Can you say "ethical boundary violation"...........this group pulled a similar stunt with gun ownership during the Clinton administration (and lost 50% of its membership in the process).......didn't go over too well, and this one won't go over well either.

Doctors (of any specialty) have a natural aversion to potential lawsuits........and steer a wide path around this kind of thing

As a side note, this is why the actual membership in the AMA (and other national medical lobbying groups) is at an all-time low, and sinking every day.

The "American Association of Pediatricians" is nothing more than a progressive advocacy group........



If a pediatrician considers this to be pernicious nonsense and refuses to go along with it, how long do you think it will take for the AAP to sanction him?

A "sanction" is meaningless if the physician is a non-member, and I suspect very few of them actually are.........

doc

Novaheart
06-25-2013, 11:56 AM
What is the complaint?

Gay kids should get the same level of social support that heterosexual kids do.

TVDOC
06-25-2013, 12:14 PM
What is the complaint?

Gay kids should get the same level of social support that heterosexual kids do.

A physician provides medical treatment and medical advice.......not "social support"..........that's not their job.

Want "social support" go to a social worker or a psychologist, that IS their job...........

doc

Odysseus
06-25-2013, 12:17 PM
What is the complaint?

Gay kids should get the same level of social support that heterosexual kids do.

But it isn't just gay, is it? The article cites support for "lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ)", which means that those kids who consider themselves improperly "assigned" a gender by nature will receive support for their impending mutilations and Questioning kids will have their questions answered in accordance with politically correct agendas.

How about we just have the doctors stick to medicine and stop trying to use pseudoscience to rewrite our culture?

Novaheart
06-25-2013, 12:48 PM
How about we just have the doctors stick to medicine and stop trying to use pseudoscience to rewrite our culture?

It has nothing to do with rewriting the culture. It has to do with being a good doctor. Doctors may not be the caring and involved idealized persons we see on TV, but knowledge of the patient is part of the care.

Adults send messages to kids which make the kids withhold information or lie rather than face disapproval or in the case of gay youth betrayal. A gay kid needs to be able to tell a doctor everything, just like a straight kid does. If a doctor is missing a piece of the puzzle, then the patient can miss out on care or preventative care.

This is not the same thing as pediatricians asking if you have a gun in the house. This is about a pediatrician making his presentation and interaction with the patient such that the patient is comfortable and well cared for. By the same token, if a kid's pediatrician is some right wing asshole religious nut, the kid needs to know it so he can tell his parents "I hate doctor Stemberger, I want to go to another doctor."

Rockntractor
06-25-2013, 12:53 PM
This is not the same thing as pediatricians asking if you have a gun in the house. This is about a pediatrician making his presentation and interaction with the patient such that the patient is comfortable and well cared for.

We also don't need a pediatrician saying "hey, have you ever stuck that in someones ass, it is an option you know".

noonwitch
06-25-2013, 01:07 PM
Doctors have an obligation to treat their patients with respect and dignity. I don't think that means they need to have rainbow stickers in their offices, or even go to the lengths this article says (gender neutral paperwork, for example).

For a doctor to treat a patient best, he or she needs to know the person. The kid needs to be comfortable in talking to his or her doctor. I don't really think that this is a widespread problem with pediatricians, though. I think most doctors in general are able to put any prejudices aside when they are treating patients. A doctor who specializes in pediatrics does so because he or she likes kids. A pediatrician who specializes in treating adolescents is probably going to be particularly sensitive to the sexual issues that teens face, regardless of orientation.

Generation Why?
06-25-2013, 01:22 PM
What is the complaint?

Gay kids should get the same level of social support that heterosexual kids do.

No argument from me, Nova. But this homophobia is not a medical condition. Therefore a medical doctor is not required.

TVDOC
06-25-2013, 01:30 PM
It has nothing to do with rewriting the culture. It has to do with being a good doctor. Doctors may not be the caring and involved idealized persons we see on TV, but knowledge of the patient is part of the care.

Adults send messages to kids which make the kids withhold information or lie rather than face disapproval or in the case of gay youth betrayal. A gay kid needs to be able to tell a doctor everything, just like a straight kid does. If a doctor is missing a piece of the puzzle, then the patient can miss out on care or preventative care.

This is not the same thing as pediatricians asking if you have a gun in the house. This is about a pediatrician making his presentation and interaction with the patient such that the patient is comfortable and well cared for. By the same token, if a kid's pediatrician is some right wing asshole religious nut, the kid needs to know it so he can tell his parents "I hate doctor Stemberger, I want to go to another doctor."

Lame....but typical.........BS/PC non-answer......

From your grammar and syntax, I can deduce that you are a reasonably intelligent person..........there are also a vast plethora of subjects discussed on this board as well......however you waste your efforts defending queer/pervert topics, that you well know you aren't going to succeed in convincing anyone......why is that??

.....Do you have a martyr complex?

.....Do you simply wish to disrupt an ongoing discussion just for amusement?

.....Are you so egotistical and self-centered that you really believe that what you say will change anyone's mind?

.....Do you do what you do simply to impress the lurkers ("guests") as the "token" homosexual here?

It's entirely possible that you could impart your knowledge in a vast array of subjects, but you can's seem to bring yourself to embrace the world of discussion here.....

Overall, that just makes you boring, and not really worthy of more than cursory responses......generally a waste of time to read........

Inquiring minds wish to know......

Note to Mods: apologies for the off-topic comments......


doc

txradioguy
06-25-2013, 02:34 PM
What is the complaint?

Gay kids should get the same level of social support that heterosexual kids do.


This kind of crap has about as much to do with a Doctors office as them questioning the children they treat about how many guns mommy and daddy have in their house.

txradioguy
06-25-2013, 02:36 PM
Lame....but typical.........BS/PC non-answer......

From your grammar and syntax, I can deduce that you are a reasonably intelligent person..........there are also a vast plethora of subjects discussed on this board as well......however you waste your efforts defending queer/pervert topics, that you well know you aren't going to succeed in convincing anyone......why is that??

.....Do you have a martyr complex?

.....Do you simply wish to disrupt an ongoing discussion just for amusement?

.....Are you so egotistical and self-centered that you really believe that what you say will change anyone's mind?

.....Do you do what you do simply to impress the lurkers ("guests") as the "token" homosexual here?

It's entirely possible that you could impart your knowledge in a vast array of subjects, but you can's seem to bring yourself to embrace the world of discussion here.....

Overall, that just makes you boring, and not really worthy of more than cursory responses......generally a waste of time to read........

Inquiring minds wish to know......

Note to Mods: apologies for the off-topic comments......


doc

http://stuffpoint.com/funny-gifs/image/256621-funny-gifs-citizen-kane-clapping.gif

Novaheart
06-25-2013, 03:50 PM
Doctors have an obligation to treat their patients with respect and dignity. I don't think that means they need to have rainbow stickers in their offices, or even go to the lengths this article says (gender neutral paperwork, for example).

For a doctor to treat a patient best, he or she needs to know the person. The kid needs to be comfortable in talking to his or her doctor. I don't really think that this is a widespread problem with pediatricians, though. I think most doctors in general are able to put any prejudices aside when they are treating patients. A doctor who specializes in pediatrics does so because he or she likes kids. A pediatrician who specializes in treating adolescents is probably going to be particularly sensitive to the sexual issues that teens face, regardless of orientation.

Most doctors are able to put their prejudices aside, but some aren't. I had a surgeon once whom I spent very little time with before the surgery and considerable time with after the surgery (which didn't turn out well). In the follow up I found him to be distant and borderline hostile both to caring for me and doing paperwork and that sort of thing. As I sat in his waiting room on the second or third follow up I noticed born-again or fundamentalist christian magazines, and while someone had drawn through the address with a black pen, I could still see that these magazines had been originally sent to the doctor's home. I went to a different doctor, and when the new doctor asked why I was switching doctors. I told him I didn't like Doctor X and new doctor's response was that he didn't want to in essence get involved with a dissatisfied patient issue. I told him that I found Doctor X to be hostile and I suspected it was because I am gay. The other doctor, who knew Doctor X just nodded and we continued.

Novaheart
06-25-2013, 03:54 PM
Lame....but typical.........BS/PC non-answer......

From your grammar and syntax, I can deduce that you are a reasonably intelligent person..........there are also a vast plethora of subjects discussed on this board as well......however you waste your efforts defending queer/pervert topics, that you well know you aren't going to succeed in convincing anyone......why is that??

.....Do you have a martyr complex?

.....Do you simply wish to disrupt an ongoing discussion just for amusement?

.....Are you so egotistical and self-centered that you really believe that what you say will change anyone's mind?

.....Do you do what you do simply to impress the lurkers ("guests") as the "token" homosexual here?

It's entirely possible that you could impart your knowledge in a vast array of subjects, but you can's seem to bring yourself to embrace the world of discussion here.....

Overall, that just makes you boring, and not really worthy of more than cursory responses......generally a waste of time to read........

Inquiring minds wish to know......

Note to Mods: apologies for the off-topic comments......


doc

There is purpose to simply not allowing ignorance and superstition to go unchallenged. I may not convince anyone to admit he is wrong, but he will know he is wrong.

noonwitch
06-25-2013, 03:58 PM
Most doctors are able to put their prejudices aside, but some aren't. I had a surgeon once whom I spent very little time with before the surgery and considerable time with after the surgery (which didn't turn out well). In the follow up I found him to be distant and borderline hostile both to caring for me and doing paperwork and that sort of thing. As I sat in his waiting room on the second or third follow up I noticed born-again or fundamentalist christian magazines, and while someone had drawn through the address with a black pen, I could still see that these magazines had been originally sent to the doctor's home. I went to a different doctor, and when the new doctor asked why I was switching doctors. I told him I didn't like Doctor X and new doctor's response was that he didn't want to in essence get involved with a dissatisfied patient issue. I told him that I found Doctor X to be hostile and I suspected it was because I am gay. The other doctor, who knew Doctor X just nodded and we continued.


I went to a male OB/Gyn who seemed to have issues with women's bodies. Go and figure.

Zathras
06-26-2013, 12:24 AM
It has nothing to do with rewriting the culture.

This one sentence nullifies the rest of your post princess. It has everything to do with the culture and to say otherwise is an out and out lie and you know it...too bad you're too fucking stupid to realize this fact.

Zathras
06-26-2013, 12:28 AM
There is purpose to simply not allowing ignorance and superstition to go unchallenged. I may not convince anyone to admit he is wrong, but he will know he is wrong.

Your opinion, which the above is, does not make it wrong or right.

Odysseus
06-26-2013, 09:44 AM
It has nothing to do with rewriting the culture. It has to do with being a good doctor. Doctors may not be the caring and involved idealized persons we see on TV, but knowledge of the patient is part of the care.

Adults send messages to kids which make the kids withhold information or lie rather than face disapproval or in the case of gay youth betrayal. A gay kid needs to be able to tell a doctor everything, just like a straight kid does. If a doctor is missing a piece of the puzzle, then the patient can miss out on care or preventative care.

This is not the same thing as pediatricians asking if you have a gun in the house. This is about a pediatrician making his presentation and interaction with the patient such that the patient is comfortable and well cared for. By the same token, if a kid's pediatrician is some right wing asshole religious nut, the kid needs to know it so he can tell his parents "I hate doctor Stemberger, I want to go to another doctor."

It has to do with both. As Noonie points out, a doctor doesn't have to put out rainbow stickers or otherwise advertise himself as gay friendly in order to do his job. Another part of this, which is not being addressed, is that we are talking about pediatricians, doctors who treat children. My concern is that this is part of the ongoing sexualization of childhood, which many, but not all, LGBT activists see as a necessary step towards the advancement of their sexual agenda. As for your last point, what if the kid's pediatrician is a doctrinaire leftist lunatic, who tries to impose his agenda on the kid? Would that also be grounds for being able to say, "I hate Dr. Freidan. She's always telling me that boys are potential rapists and I want to go to another doctor."?


Doctors have an obligation to treat their patients with respect and dignity. I don't think that means they need to have rainbow stickers in their offices, or even go to the lengths this article says (gender neutral paperwork, for example).

For a doctor to treat a patient best, he or she needs to know the person. The kid needs to be comfortable in talking to his or her doctor. I don't really think that this is a widespread problem with pediatricians, though. I think most doctors in general are able to put any prejudices aside when they are treating patients. A doctor who specializes in pediatrics does so because he or she likes kids. A pediatrician who specializes in treating adolescents is probably going to be particularly sensitive to the sexual issues that teens face, regardless of orientation.

Gender neutral paperwork is another example of activism trumping reality.


Most doctors are able to put their prejudices aside, but some aren't. I had a surgeon once whom I spent very little time with before the surgery and considerable time with after the surgery (which didn't turn out well). In the follow up I found him to be distant and borderline hostile both to caring for me and doing paperwork and that sort of thing. As I sat in his waiting room on the second or third follow up I noticed born-again or fundamentalist christian magazines, and while someone had drawn through the address with a black pen, I could still see that these magazines had been originally sent to the doctor's home. I went to a different doctor, and when the new doctor asked why I was switching doctors. I told him I didn't like Doctor X and new doctor's response was that he didn't want to in essence get involved with a dissatisfied patient issue. I told him that I found Doctor X to be hostile and I suspected it was because I am gay. The other doctor, who knew Doctor X just nodded and we continued.

Given the doctor's hostility, are you concerned that the surgery was deliberately botched? If so, that would be malpractice.

txradioguy
06-26-2013, 11:01 AM
Gender neutral paperwork is another example of activism trumping reality.

My apoligies for the thread jack...but I just heard yesterday this is coming soon to an AR and FM near you.

*face palm*

TVDOC
06-26-2013, 12:49 PM
There is purpose to simply not allowing ignorance and superstition to go unchallenged. I may not convince anyone to admit he is wrong, but he will know he is wrong.

So this would be the correct answer.......


.....Are you so egotistical and self-centered that you really believe that what you say will change anyone's mind?


It would be helpful if you were more honest about it.........but I suppose that would be too much to ask.

doc

Generation Why?
06-26-2013, 01:04 PM
My apoligies for the thread jack...but I just heard yesterday this is coming soon to an AR and FM near you.

*face palm*

..... :smilie_wall:

Bailey
06-26-2013, 01:31 PM
..... :smilie_wall:

But you are to blame for this, if not for "let them do their thing" their wouldn't be stuff like this happening.

txradioguy
06-26-2013, 02:48 PM
..... :smilie_wall:

Get used to it. Just read yesterday that as part of the attempt to integrate women into the Infantry and Armor all FM's AR's and TM's will stop using the terms "male and female" when referring to soldiers and just say "soldiers" by 2017. The thought and language police arrive at an Army post near you in the near future...get ready.

Also segregated sleeping quarters are going away in the same time frame. You can imagine what's gonna get de-segrated next.

Add our leaders will sit there in the Pentagon scratching their heads and navel gaze trying to figure out why sexual assault incidents keep steadily climbing.

This is what happens when people who have no real clue about the military and people in uniform who care more about politics and promotions than the soldiers use us to conduct social engineering experiments.

Generation Why?
06-26-2013, 02:51 PM
get used to it. Just read yesterday that as part of the attempt to integrate women into the Infantry and Armor all FM's AR's and TM's will stop using the terms "male and female" when referring to soldiers and just say "soldiers" by 2017. The thought and language police arrive at an Army post near you in the near future...get ready.

The sheer concept doesn't really bother me. The fact that they actually want to spend the time and money to do it does. Last I checked we were supposed to be adults who understand context.

Generation Why?
06-26-2013, 02:53 PM
But you are to blame for this, if not for "let them do their thing" their wouldn't be stuff like this happening.

Actually I just called for tougher PT standards if women wanted to go CA. Re-writing regs to erase he/she is not necessary in an Army of adults.

Generation Why?
06-26-2013, 02:55 PM
Also segregated sleeping quarters are going away in the same time frame. You can imagine what's gonna get de-segrated next.

Who dafuq thinks this is a good idea?


Add our leaders will sit there in the Pentagon scratching their heads and navel gaze trying to figure out why sexual assault incidents keep steadily climbing.

CSA and SMA are here today for a town hall. Someone should address this.


This is what happens when people who have no real clue about the military and people in uniform who care more about politics and promotions than the soldiers use us to conduct social engineering experiments.

Agreed. I actually don't think you and I disagree too much when it comes to Army policy, just on how to implement it.

txradioguy
06-26-2013, 03:04 PM
Who dafuq thinks this is a good idea?

A lot of it can be traced to a little group called DACOWITS.

http://dacowits.defense.gov




CSA and SMA are here today for a town hall. Someone should address this.

I'd put you in for an Impact AAM if it was verifiable that you asked them.




Agreed. I actually don't think you and I disagree too much when it comes to Army policy, just on how to implement it.

You're right.

Generation Why?
06-26-2013, 03:11 PM
I'd put you in for an Impact AAM if it was verifiable that you asked them.



I appreciate the (would-be) gesture.

Odysseus
06-26-2013, 06:36 PM
The sheer concept doesn't really bother me. The fact that they actually want to spend the time and money to do it does. Last I checked we were supposed to be adults who understand context.

This is why doctrine is critical, because it eventually becomes practically applied policy. The services have been pursuing two mutually exclusive doctrines since the 70s, the elimination of gender restrictions in the force, and the reduction in sexual harassment and assault incidents in the ranks. It never seems to occur to far too many of our leaders that there is not just a corelation, but a causal relationship between the two. The more barriers to intimacy that you eliminate, the more intimacy you get, and not all of it will be consensual. Take the argument about co-ed barracks and latrines. The purpose of separate latrines and barracks is to provide safe havens for both sexes. A male in a female latrine is automatically presumed to be up to no good, and therefore a female has a safe zone where she is supposed to be free of sexual threat. A male in a female college dorm used to have to overcome the same stigma, but that's gone the way of the unisex college. Since the advent of co-ed dorms, the rate of sexual assaults on campuses has risen dramatically, to the point where people now feel the need to hold "Take back the night" rallies. We're at the point in the armed forces where we are dealing with many of the same issues, because the powers that be are more concerned with appearing to be clever, liberated and in tune with the latest notions of gender, instead of accomplishing a warfighting mission. The increased presence of women in the ranks has led to other changes unanticipated changes. It used to be that you couldn't have dual career couples in the army, but so many men and women have met through their service that it became impossible to keep the number up when Soldiers married each other. Now, we have parents deploying to separate theaters simultaneously and children having to be placed with other relatives as a matter of policy. How many times have you seen one of those marriages fail because one partner or the other cheated during a deployment? What is the impact on those dependents?


Actually I just called for tougher PT standards if women wanted to go CA. Re-writing regs to erase he/she is not necessary in an Army of adults.

We are not an army of adults, not even in the most technical sense of the term. Many junior enlisted Soldiers are too young to drink (under age 21, by law) or even vote (18). Putting a 17 year old boy and a 17 year old girl into a co-ed barracks and lecturing them about sex is like giving them whiskey and car keys and then wondering why they got into a wreck. A lot of the senior leaders are no better (I once had to deal with an O4 who wrote inappropriate poetry to an E4 when I was an HHC commander). The point is that cannot assume that everyone will comport themselves professionally at all times, which is why you have to have safeguards in place, and many of the traditional modes of separating the sexes were safeguards. Eliminate them and you eliminate the protections that they afforded. All the SHARP PowerPoint presentations in the world won't restore them.

Tougher PT standards for women will not remain unless someone is willing to stand up to the civilian leadership and put his career on the line in order to protect them. When the New York City Fire Department was ordered to accept women, they had a physical entrance exam that was extremely demanding and realistic. One of the requirements was that the applicant had to carry a 200lb dummy up and down a flight of stairs a certain number of time within the allotted time. None of the first group of women who took the test could pass that part of it, so they washed out. They got a lawyer and sued and a judge ruled in their favor. The new test involved dragging the dummy down a corridor. Nobody denied that the first test was an accurate approximation of a situation in which a firefighter might find himself, but it didn't matter, because diversity was more important than doing the job. When the Army opened up airborne school to women, there was a pull up requirement (you steer the chute by pulling on the lines, so upper body strength was a critical factor), but because women couldn't do full pull ups, they changed the requirement. Men still had to do pull ups, but women had to do a flexed arm hang. Do you doubt for one moment that in a few years, the Army or the DOD will have to defend against a lawsuit brought by women who washed out of 11B or 19D AIT, Ranger School or SFQC? I started out in cav, as a 19D when I was enlisted, and then as an armor officer when I was commissioned. One of the basic requirements for an armor crewman is to be able to load the main gun. That means pulling a 120mm round out of the ready rack, rotating it 180 degrees (in an area the size of a phone booth), shoving it into the breech of the main gun, locking the breech and arming the gun, all in under five seconds, and then doing it again and again, every time the gun is fired. After tank gunnery, my arms felt like they'd been beaten with tankers' bars (and at the time, the rounds were 105mm, and only weight about 70lbs). I can't wait to see how they gender norm that requirement.

Odysseus
06-26-2013, 06:38 PM
I appreciate the (would-be) gesture.

You do it, provide me with a video, and I'll put you in for an ARCOM. Of course, it will be your separation award, because they'll bounce you out so hard that you'll end up landing OCONUS, but that's another issue. :friendly_wink:

Generation Why?
06-26-2013, 06:53 PM
You do it, provide me with a video, and I'll put you in for an ARCOM. Of course, it will be your separation award, because they'll bounce you out so hard that you'll end up landing OCONUS, but that's another issue. :friendly_wink:

As long as I land somewhere nice. :adoration:

Generation Why?
06-26-2013, 06:54 PM
I can't wait to see how they gender norm that requirement.

One standard for all Combat Arms jobs? The pre-existing standard would be my vote.