The Student Room Group

Doctor sacked for referring to patients by biological sex

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5930593/Doctor-fired-government-role-insisting-gender-determined-birth.html

Outrageous. Another example of Christians facing discrimination at the hands of the far left.

Scroll to see replies

The thing about this is the doc was likely given about 50 memos telling him/her/them not to do this; then this doctor refused to comply.

I have a hard time feeling sorry for a fool such as that.
In other words, man has employment contract terminated for refusing to follow simple instructions and responds by going full victimhood.
Reply 3
Someone who calls themselves a doctor should not be deliberately ignoring conclusive scientific evidence in favour of their own bigotry. Clearly this bloke needs to go back to medical school if he thinks the human brain is a simple and straightforward mechanism when it comes to identity.
‘Preferred gender’ is BS. I can’t believe that is a thing. Soon we’ll have crazy people trying to make ‘preferred species’ socially acceptable, or worse...
Original post by gnwekor
‘Preferred gender’ is BS. I can’t believe that is a thing. Soon we’ll have crazy people trying to make ‘preferred species’ socially acceptable, or worse...



You are right, we already have transracial and funny enough they are W2B.
Now you wouldn't expect that would you if the Blacks are the oppressed ones? 🙂
(edited 5 years ago)
Reply 6
Original post by Dez
Someone who calls themselves a doctor should not be deliberately ignoring conclusive scientific evidence in favour of their own bigotry. Clearly this bloke needs to go back to medical school if he thinks the human brain is a simple and straightforward mechanism when it comes to identity.


Possibly so but if said case was in reference to this persons sex say ovarian or testicular cancer, as an example, it would make it somewhat hard to ignore the biological facts irrespective of what belief the patient may or may not hold?
Good for him for staying true to his convictions
However, wanting to work for the notorious agencies that destroy the sick and disabled anyway should have pricked his conscience far more to start with.....
Doctor does *****y thing to patients, gets sacked. I don't see how this is news.
Reply 9
Sad that you can get fired for stating the truth -- that sex is biological. It's surreal to think that nowadays the idea that sex is established at birth is controversial, with absolutely no proof to the contrary. And no, gender studies is not a scientific subject.


Original post by Dez
Someone who calls themselves a doctor should not be deliberately ignoring conclusive scientific evidence in favour of their own bigotry. Clearly this bloke needs to go back to medical school if he thinks the human brain is a simple and straightforward mechanism when it comes to identity.


A bunch of snowflakes theorycrafting about how chromosomes do not determine your sex is not 'conclusive scientific evidence'. It's antiscientific in fact.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Sulfolobus
In other words, man has employment contract terminated for refusing to follow simple instructions and responds by going full victimhood.


Well said.
Original post by the bear
this is very hurtful to people who identify as military equipment :emo:


I've always believed that you are a bear.
Original post by Napp
Possibly so but if said case was in reference to this persons sex say ovarian or testicular cancer, as an example, it would make it somewhat hard to ignore the biological facts irrespective of what belief the patient may or may not hold?


I don't think that was the issue though. There are individuals who reasonably want their doctor to refer to them as the gender they identify as being (Mr/Miss/He/She etc.) but not examine and diagnose illness or disease ignoring their biological 'assets' as such. It's not a difficult distinction for a doctor to make and not an unreasonable one, just another 'Christian' putting their personal preferences above their responsibilities as an employee.
(edited 5 years ago)
Reply 13
Original post by Axiomasher
I don't think that was the issue though. There are individuals who reasonably want their doctor to refer to them as the gender they identify as being (Mr/Miss/He/She etc.) but not examine and diagnose illness or disease ignoring their biological 'assets' as such. It's not a difficult distinction for a doctor to make and not an unreasonable one, just another 'Christian' butting their personal preferences about their responsibilities as an employee.


No I was talking specifically in a general sense. In this instance the chap appears to have been wilfully disobedient in carrying out his duties
Reply 14
Original post by Napp
Possibly so but if said case was in reference to this persons sex say ovarian or testicular cancer, as an example, it would make it somewhat hard to ignore the biological facts irrespective of what belief the patient may or may not hold?


Oh sure because if suffering from cancer wasn't enough, dealing with rude medical staff is going to make them feel right as rain. :colonhash: It's really not that hard to be polite to people, and part of that is accepting how they prefer to be addressed.

Original post by ilem
A bunch of snowflakes theorycrafting about how chromosomes do not determine your sex is not 'conclusive scientific evidence'. It's antiscientific in fact.


You clearly know nothing about the subject if that's the best argument you can come up with. I'm not going to waste my time debating with someone so ignorant, go do some proper reading on the topic if you feel strongly about it.
Original post by the bear
this is very hurtful to people who identify as military equipment :emo:


lady tank.jpg
I don’t understand what’s so hard about reffering someone to their preffered sex, like are you that deep in your transphobia that you are willing to risk losing your job and your whole career. You really are a CLOWN.
Original post by Rainfall
You really are a CLOWN.


so offensive to the circus entertainer community :emo:
Reply 18
Original post by Dez
You clearly know nothing about the subject if that's the best argument you can come up with. I'm not going to waste my time debating with someone so ignorant, go do some proper reading on the topic if you feel strongly about it.


Touché.
I mean, given the title of the article is essentially "Doctor refuses to acknolwedge something medically proven", I don't see why this is anything other than a totally justified firing. He's entitled to his own opinion, but what he cannot do is prevent that from letting him give full care and treatment to his patients. If he is unable to do that, he shouldn't remain in the profession.

Quick Reply

Latest