GP facing the sack for "discrimination" over the veil Watch

Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#61
Report 1 month ago
#61
(Original post by Good bloke)
You might want me to but I wouldn't. I would say 'dumb' just as I wrote it. You must realise that political correctness is something to be resisted, not something to submit to. Just because you mean something nasty when you use a particular word does not mean I do.

Once you have control over the words I use you will want control over the things I do, or think. Oh, I forgot, you already do want that control.
Political correctness straight up isn't a thing, it's a term made up by the right wing to demonise basic civility (i.e. Not setting out with the intent of offending people) in discourse.
1
reply
_gcx
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#62
Report 1 month ago
#62
Really don't think this is the case - this would mean they don't actually believe in it and they're using it strategically, which just isn't true. Whether their observations are correct or not is besides the point.
1
reply
username4728618
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#63
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#63
(Original post by shadowdweller)
I do, but thank you for requesting confirmation! It actually doesn't state that he intended to offer alternatives; it acknowledges that he could not have implemented the suggested option, but does not state that he considered it at the time.

There is also no reason that she should have looked for one beforehand - not every individual struggles to communicate with someone wearing a veil, and she wasn't even the patient in question, so there would have been no expectation she would have to remove it for her daughter to be treated.

Naturally I would not have preferred her to be sent away - but as has been previously stated, offering a pen and paper would have been another alternative, and one that was readily available.
You've lost the plot. Its common for Muslim women to request female doctors BEFORE the consultation because it suits their needs and its an option available to them. The GP has dealt with many veiled women and he had no problem communicating with them but in this case he did so he then kindly asked if she could remove it which is a common thing to do anyway.

Joyce Robins, from Patient Concern said losing a doctor over the issue would be ‘criminal’. ‘A doctor needs to be sensitive to a patient’s religion but safety must always come first,’ she added.


A spokesman for The Doctors’ Association UK said: ‘It is of utmost importance that the religious wishes of our patients are respected. However, evidently there are some circumstances where removal of a niqab or burka is necessary for medical assessment and treatment.

I assume you don't value the safety of patients either given how severe tonsillitis can be for a child do you honestly suggest it would have been a good idea to write out the symptoms? He did the most practical thing and looked for a female GP but unfortunately there wasn't one there.
Now avoid hiding beneath your religious agenda and sympathise with the fact that Dr Wolverson not only has his reputation tainted by a medieval couple but no longer wants to practise as a GP and this will impact the NHS along with thousands of others.
Last edited by username4728618; 1 month ago
1
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#64
Report 1 month ago
#64
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
The GMC received a complaint, they've a duty to investigate it - if he was respectful and offered other means of communication (e.g. pen and paper) if she was uncomfortable taking the veil off then there shouldn't be a problem and the investigation should clear his name. If however he wasn't respectful and didn't offer alternatives for his patients comfort then he's got a pretty shocking manner which really he needs to address before caring for patients.
Are you seriously saying that a doctor in the uk should be investigated for asking a woman to remove facial garments covering her mouth and face?

In the seventh century islam's prophet ordered that his female followers must always keep their face and hands visible.
He expressly forbade women from wearing the traditional koreshi face covering garments and gloves worn by female manat cult polytheists.
The koran does not require anyone to cover their faces, hands or eyes.

Many sunni imams deny females wearing any facial coverings or gloves admission to both their homes and sunni religious centres.
I know a few that do this, their explanations for refusing entrance can sound quite aggressive, are far from respectful and they never back down.
Even for young girls under the age of ten wearing wool gloves in the snow.

In the uk it has been standard policy for business premises to operate a "no hats and faces fully visible" entrance policy for over a century.
Many banks, casinos and corner shops do.
Islam's own prophet forbade the wearing of all face coverings and gloves over a thousand years ago.
This farce is much ado about nothing and resembles the Jack Straw hysteria, all over again.
0
reply
shadowdweller
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#65
Report 1 month ago
#65
(Original post by Mental Asylum)
You've lost the plot. Its common for Muslim women to request female doctors BEFORE the consultation because it suits their needs and its an option available to them. The GP has dealt with many veiled women and he had no problem communicating with them but in this case he did so he then kindly asked if she could remove it which is a common thing to do anyway.

Joyce Robins, from Patient Concern said losing a doctor over the issue would be ‘criminal’. ‘A doctor needs to be sensitive to a patient’s religion but safety must always come first,’ she added.


A spokesman for The Doctors’ Association UK said: ‘It is of utmost importance that the religious wishes of our patients are respected. However, evidently there are some circumstances where removal of a niqab or burka is necessary for medical assessment and treatment.

I assume you don't value the safety of patients either given how severe tonsillitis can be for a child do you honestly suggest it would have been a good idea to write out the symptoms? He did the most practical thing and looked for a female GP but unfortunately there wasn't one there.
Now avoid hiding beneath your religious agenda and sympathise with the fact that Dr Wolverson not only has his reputation tainted by a medieval couple but no longer wants to practise as a GP and this will impact the NHS along with thousands of others.
That is entirely understandable if she were the patient in question - given she is not, I can understand why she would not have expected to need to remove the veil, and therefore why she would not have thought to request a female GP upon booking. As has been stated in the article, in previous situations where he has dealt with patients wearing a veil, they took it off without him asking, it is not the case that he has requested a removal previously.

Naturally I value the safety of patients; there is no inherent danger in writing out symptoms any more than there is vocally listing them - the doctor could have asked the same follow-up questions, and would have had the same information provided. There would be no additional danger to the child, nor would I be suggesting this if there were.

When it comes to the bolded parts of the quote you have pasted here, I continue to agree that this would apply if she were actually the patient; she was not being medically assessed or treated, however, and there are alternatives where it is simply the case that he was having trouble understanding what she was saying.

To clarify here, I have no religious agenda - I am an atheist, and always have been. I am supportive of a person's rights to their own beliefs, not of the religious connotations behind them.
0
reply
username4728618
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#66
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#66
(Original post by shadowdweller)
To clarify here, I have no religious agenda - I am an atheist, and always have been. I am supportive of a person's rights to their own beliefs, not of the religious connotations behind them.
This explains your lack of sympathy and your responses on this thread, thank you. I guess you would say the same when it comes to stoning homosexuals because after all that is a belief muslims hold
0
reply
shadowdweller
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#67
Report 1 month ago
#67
(Original post by Mental Asylum)
This explains your lack of sympathy and your responses on this thread, thank you. I guess you would say the same when it comes to stoning homosexuals because after all that is a belief muslims hold
I would defer you to my previous post; the most extreme thing I've proposed is that he could have offered her a pen and paper to write down the symptoms on - this is a very common practice in appointments, and one that is often suggested to people who are nervous, or have trouble communicating for any other reason, so it would not be something outrageous for him to have thought of, and it would have provided her the chance to get her daughter proper care without having been asked to remove her veil.

Needless to say a) there is a significant difference between supporting a belief that causes no harm, and supporting one that doesn't and b) as a gay woman, no, I would not support that, nor any belief that harmed an individual or a group of people. But again, thank you for asking for clarification :yep:
0
reply
username4728618
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#68
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#68
(Original post by shadowdweller)
Needless to say a) there is a significant difference between supporting a belief that causes no harm, and supporting one that doesn't and b) as a gay woman, no, I would not support that, nor any belief that harmed an individual or a group of people. But again, thank you for asking for clarification :yep:
Ignorance is bliss! just to be on the safe side I wouldn't open up a quran or research the story of lut because it explicitly depicts harm and that would indeed be traumatic for you.
Last edited by username4728618; 1 month ago
0
reply
shadowdweller
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#69
Report 1 month ago
#69
(Original post by Mental Asylum)
Ignorance is bliss! just to be on the safe side I wouldn't open up a quran or research the story of lut because it explicitly depicts harm and that would indeed be traumatic for you.
I am well aware of the story of lut, and all religious stances on LGBT+ people, in fact - that's part of why my previous post explicitly states that I am supportive only of the beliefs that do not cause harm; in this case, there was an alternative option that did not cause harm or upset to either party, and you have yet to provide a good reason why it would not have worked.
0
reply
username4728618
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#70
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#70
(Original post by shadowdweller)
I am well aware of the story of lut, and all religious stances on LGBT+ people, in fact - that's part of why my previous post explicitly states that I am supportive only of the beliefs that do not cause harm; in this case, there was an alternative option that did not cause harm or upset to either party, and you have yet to provide a good reason why it would not have worked.
In that case you would have supported Hitlers regime which preached hatred for Jews, gypsies and the disabled only if they didn't physically harm them. I think this is where you realise you don't know what your views are. :rofl:
0
reply
shadowdweller
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#71
Report 1 month ago
#71
(Original post by Mental Asylum)
In that case you would have supported Hitlers regime which preached hatred for Jews, gypsies and the disabled only if they didn't physically harm them. I think this is where you realise you don't know what your views are. :rofl:
Preaching hatred causes harm, as is clear to most individuals. Are you going to address my point around writing the symptoms being an entirely suitable alternative, or are you planning to just keep continuing to make strawmen?
1
reply
ltsmith
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#72
Report 1 month ago
#72
I hope he is considering legal action for unfair dismissal
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#73
Report 1 month ago
#73
So you deny that you are trying to force me to use the words you would use? My language, by the way adheres to norms of basic civility, though it may not conform to the heightened ideas of civility prevalent among the piously censorious.

You have to use those different words because you associate meanings with the existing words that are offensive, and wish to avoid giving offence by using them. I, on the other hand, do not use the existing words to give offence so do not need to use the alternatives you are forced into. When I say that someone is dumb I mean that they cannot speak and not that they are stupid. I imply nothing by the statement that is unrelated to the fact of not being able to speak. That you think I might mean something unpleasant is your problem, not mine.

I also resist all attempts to drag me into the pit into which you have got yourself by enforcing your own self-imposed rules on me (and that is what political correctness is).

The English language is a rich one and if I wish to give offence I will do so without resorting to mealy-mouthed innuendo, and those being offended would be clear that I intended it.
0
reply
username4728618
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#74
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#74
(Original post by shadowdweller)
Preaching hatred causes harm, as is clear to most individuals. Are you going to address my point around writing the symptoms being an entirely suitable alternative, or are you planning to just keep continuing to make strawmen?
If preaching hatred causes harm then how can you support the beliefs of Islam which explicitly state harm?

I already have addressed it but because this issue of harm has made you uncertain in your views you wish to shift the focus back onto the alternatives but I don't mind repeating it again.

The GP did look for a female doctor but unfortunately there wasn't one. I think you need acknowledge here that he did look for an alternative. Secondly, writing the symptoms isn't practical for obvious reasons. Can you explain to me what the GP would say to the patients that came after this couple? Why did it take an hour for this consultation to happen? He truly cared about his patient which is why he kindly asked the mother to remove her veil in order for better communication. He's been a GP for 27 years do you not think the couple are at fault here?
0
reply
shadowdweller
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#75
Report 1 month ago
#75
(Original post by Mental Asylum)
If preaching hatred causes harm then how can you support the beliefs of Islam which explicitly state harm?

I already have addressed it but because this issue of harm has made you uncertain in your views you wish to shift the focus back onto the alternatives but I don't mind repeating it again.

The GP did look for a female doctor but unfortunately there wasn't one. I think you need acknowledge here that he did look for an alternative. Secondly, writing the symptoms isn't practical for obvious reasons. Can you explain to me what the GP would say to the patients that came after this couple? Why did it take an hour for this consultation to happen? He truly cared about his patient which is why he kindly asked the mother to remove her veil in order for better communication. He's been a GP for 27 years do you not think the couple are at fault here?
I'm not clear where the confusion is here, I'm afraid - as I have repeatedly stated, I do not support every single belief, nor am I supporting a religion in any way - I am supporting an individual's right to their own beliefs, assuming those beliefs do not cause harm. Needless to say, I do not support the beliefs of Islam which explicitly cause harm, which I have repeatedly made clear.

No, you have not - what you've done is shift the discussion back to whether he looked for a female GP, which we have covered already; when I initially suggested using a pen and paper, you stated that it would not provide the daughter with due care. I have since pointed out that it is a system that is frequently both used, and recommended, and you have yet to provide a follow-up to this as to why it would not have been wholly suitable for this situation.

It actually doesn't state that, even in the article you provided - it states their was not a female doctor available, but at no point does he suggest that he was considering it as an alternative, nor that he explained this to the patient. Additionally, it is not the only alternative; he could quite easily have given her a pen and paper when he realised no female GP was available, and that would have easily resolved the situation. I don't think the situation is faultless from either side - she could have stated at the time if she felt uncomfortable with removing it, and he could have proposed a better alternative before suggesting she remove the veil.
1
reply
shadowdweller
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#76
Report 1 month ago
#76
(Original post by ltsmith)
I hope he is considering legal action for unfair dismissal
It's worth noting that he hasn't been dismissed, he is being investigated - which would be the case with each and any complaint made against him.
0
reply
username4728618
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#77
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#77
(Original post by shadowdweller)
It's worth noting that he hasn't been dismissed, he is being investigated - which would be the case with each and any complaint made against him.
And you do understand he cannot work while being investigated by the GMC?
0
reply
username4728618
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#78
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#78
https://www.change.org/p/general-med...-getting-fired

Please sign this petition. He doesn't deserve his reputation and career ruined because of a toxic and medieval ideology. A civilised and faultless individual who did nothing but his job. I don't think any of us truly understand what must be going through his mind right now.
1
reply
shadowdweller
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#79
Report 1 month ago
#79
(Original post by Mental Asylum)
And you do understand he cannot work while being investigated by the GMC?
Of course - however, a dismissal and an investigation are still vastly different things.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#80
Report 1 month ago
#80
(Original post by shadowdweller)
Of course - however, a dismissal and an investigation are still vastly different things.
They both stop him from earning a living.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice now or on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (131)
19.58%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (64)
9.57%
No I am happy with my course choice (378)
56.5%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (96)
14.35%

Watched Threads

View All