Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know what state this situation developed in, but what would the doctor's responsibility be if she accepted this infant into her care and then released the infant into that situation without notifying child protective services? In some states that might bring a review of the doctor's license. I think the Doc was unwilling to take the risk.
If two men brought a 10 year old girl in to be treated for an STD and the Doc did not report the situation, would the Doc be liable? This may vary state to state, but child trafficking is a growing problem in our country and and groups like NAMBLA are gaining approval among understanding progressives. I can see where some pediatricians would be horrified by such things and be unprepared to cope with such situations. Are these topics required in med schools these days?
I don't know the answers to these questions, but these questions would not have arisen half a century ago. How far we have fallen.
Why don't you crack it open and point out the verse that says do not treat the children of "sinners"?
If the "good doctor" refused to treat the children of all "sinners" she wouldn't have much of a practice.
Guess she just picks and chooses which "sinners" are bad enough for her to refuse service to their children.
Treating their kids she will build up a bond, with the Sodomites Maybe she wants to avoid this as the Bible says to shun sodomites. You know what? Judge lest not ye be judged. These sodomites are so self absorbed they think they are entitled to be served and catered to and accepted. No one is. When someone gives you the time of the day you should be honored, if they don't you should leave them their "space" and let God sort it out.
I don't know what state this situation developed in, but what would the doctor's responsibility be if she accepted this infant into her care and then released the infant into that situation without notifying child protective services? In some states that might bring a review of the doctor's license. I think the Doc was unwilling to take the risk.
If two men brought a 10 year old girl in to be treated for an STD and the Doc did not report the situation, would the Doc be liable? This may vary state to state, but child trafficking is a growing problem in our country and and groups like NAMBLA are gaining approval among understanding progressives. I can see where some pediatricians would be horrified by such things and be unprepared to cope with such situations. Are these topics required in med schools these days?
I don't know the answers to these questions, but these questions would not have arisen half a century ago. How far we have fallen.
What do you mean? What situation? Notify child protective services of what?
Billions of people during meditation hear their inner self and the soul world.....which is the God of all.
Another set of "Special interest group" of whiners. If 95% of the voting public did not want to acknowledge sodomites and their marriage, why are they surprised that some people don't want anything to do with them? And the more they push the more they will isolate themselves.
People do not want to deal with "special groups" and their issues. People want to live and let live.
Be a sodomite and leave people alone. If someone does not want to deal with you it is because they are AFRAID OF YOUR LAWSUIT THAT STARTS OFF AS......................"It is because I am gay......blah.blah
Actually, the reverse is happening. Fewer and fewer people are cherishing the hate you hold so dear.
95% of the voting public? I see someone doesn't know how to use Google.
but where does it say to SHUN these people they consider sodomites?? what about the other forms of sin?? are they to be shunned, too?? so anyone who has committed any sort of sin according to interpretations of what is written in the bible is to be shunned?
I'll grant you, my knowledge of the bible is likely far smaller than yours, but I just do not recall any thou shalt nots about this..... unlike the thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, etc. etc.
Book of Nowhere, chapter non-existent, verse invisible.
I don't know what state this situation developed in, but what would the doctor's responsibility be if she accepted this infant into her care and then released the infant into that situation without notifying child protective services? In some states that might bring a review of the doctor's license. I think the Doc was unwilling to take the risk.
If two men brought a 10 year old girl in to be treated for an STD and the Doc did not report the situation, would the Doc be liable? This may vary state to state, but child trafficking is a growing problem in our country and and groups like NAMBLA are gaining approval among understanding progressives. I can see where some pediatricians would be horrified by such things and be unprepared to cope with such situations. Are these topics required in med schools these days?
I don't know the answers to these questions, but these questions would not have arisen half a century ago. How far we have fallen.
However the doctor had already agreed to take the baby as a patient after meeting the parents, set the appointment before the baby was born, THEN decided to not even show up on the day of their appointment. She could have easily told them when she first met them, or refused to set an appointment with them, or even called to cancel the appointment before the appointment date. But no, she didn't bother to show up for the appointment that SHE had agreed to because god says? Seriously?
After I re-read the article and the letter of apology (linked in the article) the doctor sent to the parents, I'd have to agree that the doctor handled this situation unprofessionally and badly. She should have let them know the day of the interview that she wouldn't take on their baby as a new patient, if that was her decision. And in her shoes ( as I wouldn't be, I'd never make such a decision), I'm not sure I'd tell them the real reason why, to avoid the inevitable awkwardness, to spare their feelings, whatever.
But regardless of how she felt about the parents' relationship, IMO there's no excuse for the doctor letting them think she'd take on the baby's care, even making an appointment, and then sending in a colleague to see the baby, and leaving the colleague to inform them why she couldn't see the baby? I'd have been piZZed too if I were the parents, though whether or not I've had let this personal insult become fodder for the LGBT community, I'm not sure. IMO it's too personal an issue for it to become viral on the internet, allowing strangers to speculate and pass judgement as they will ( which admittedly, I'm doing too!)
It seemed to me when I read the letter of apology sent by the doctor to the parents, the doctor had conflicts regarding her ability to deal with the parents' relationship, resulting in her waffling back and forth about seeing them. The letter seemed awkward, I guess an apology is better than nothing, but she still comes across badly, IMO, especially as she didn't even seem able to face them after she had decided not to see the baby, or to let them know personally of her decision. I don't know what one does in this situation, IMO the graceful thing to do would be for the doctor to speak to the couple personally, be honest about her prejudices and let them know that overcoming them would be a work in progress- at least I think that's what I'd do if I found myself in that boat.
It's interesting that those who are using this occasion as yet another excuse to bash Christianity and those who believe in its tenets, assume that this doctor is a Christian. And bash away they do, we all know that Christianity is a safe target so they can let loose with impunity. (BTW I'm not Christian, but I can see and I can read) She may be a Christian but it's also quite possible that she isn't. Perhaps she is a Muslim. I suggest that based on her name, and the location of the office- Detroit but it's pretty close to Dearborn, where lots and lots of Muslims are located. Just speculating about that, of course, but you DO know that Islam forbids homosexuality, and depending on where that religion is practiced and by whom, the penalties for engaging in homosexual behavior can be quite severe. What if this doctor's reluctance to become involved in a doctor-parent relationship with a same-sex couple is based on her Muslim beliefs? Would she be so soundly condemned by those doing so now, if this were the case? Just throwing out the idea.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
nice twist...
