• commentary
  • FRIDAY MARCH 23 2012 9:26 AM

A Doctor On Transvaginal Ultrasounds: Where Is The Physician Outrage?

There’s one group of people that has been strangely silent when it comes to the current War on Women, and more specifically legislation that requires women to have a state-mandated transvaginal ultrasound before an abortion. Before being allowed to practice, physicians take the hippocratic oath – a promise that they will do no harm. This politically driven policy clearly forces medical practitioners to violate that oath, since the procedure is invasive, uncomfortable, medically unnecessary, not to mention highly emotionally distressing for many women. Here, in a post that was first published on Whatever.scalzi.com, an anonymous doctor speaks out against what’s been dubbed “state-rape.” – Nicole Powers, SG Ed.



Where Is The Physician Outrage?

by An Anonymous Doctor

Right. Here.

I’m speaking, of course, about the required-transvaginal-ultrasound thing that seems to be the flavor-of-the-month in politics.

I do not care what your personal politics are. I think we can all agree that my right to swing my fist ends where your face begins.

I do not feel that it is reactionary or even inaccurate to describe an unwanted, non-indicated transvaginal ultrasound as “rape”. If I insert ANY object into ANY orifice without informed consent, it is rape. And coercion of any kind negates consent, informed or otherwise.

In all of the discussion and all of the outrage and all of the Doonesbury comics, I find it interesting that we physicians are relatively silent.

After all, it’s our hands that will supposedly be used to insert medical equipment (tools of HEALING, for the sake of all that is good and holy) into the vaginas of coerced women.

Fellow physicians, once again we are being used as tools to screw people over. This time, it’s the politicians who want to use us to implement their morally reprehensible legislation.

They want to use our ultrasound machines to invade women’s bodies, and they want our hands to be at the controls. Coerced and invaded women, you have a problem with that? Blame us evil doctors. We are such deliciously silent scapegoats.

It is our responsibility, as always, to protect our patients from things that would harm them. Therefore, as physicians, it is our duty to refuse to perform a medical procedure that is not medically indicated. Any medical procedure. Whatever the pseudo-justification.

It’s time for a little old-fashioned civil disobedience.
Here are a few steps we can take as physicians to protect our patients from legislation such as this.

1. Just don’t comply. No matter how much our autonomy as physicians has been eroded, we still have control of what our hands do and do not do with a transvaginal ultrasound wand. If this legislation is completely ignored by the people who are supposed to implement it, it will soon be worth less than the paper it is written on.

2. Reinforce patient autonomy. It does not matter what a politician says. A woman is in charge of determining what does and what does not go into her body. If she WANTS a transvaginal ultrasound, fine. If it’s medically indicated, fine… have that discussion with her. We have informed consent for a reason. If she has to be forced to get a transvaginal ultrasound through coercion or overly impassioned argument or implied threats of withdrawal of care, that is NOT FINE.

Our position is to recommend medically-indicated tests and treatments that have a favorable benefit-to-harm ratio… and it is up to the patient to decide what she will and will not allow. Period. Politicians do not have any role in this process. NO ONE has a role in this process but the patient and her physician. If anyone tries to get in the way of that, it is our duty to run interference.

3. If you are forced to document a non-indicated transvaginal ultrasound because of this legislation, document that the patient refused the procedure or that it was not medically indicated. (Because both of those are true.) Hell, document that you attempted but the patient kicked you in the nose, if you have to.

4. If you are forced to enter an image of the ultrasound itself into the patient chart, ultrasound the bedsheets and enter that picture with a comment of “poor acoustic window”. If you’re really gutsy, enter a comment of “poor acoustic window…plus, I’m not a rapist.” (I was going to propose repeatedly entering a single identical image in affected patient’s charts nationwide, as a recognizable visual protest…but I don’t have an ultrasound image that I own to the point that I could offer it for that purpose.)

5. Do anything else you can think of to protect your patients and the integrity of the medical profession. IN THAT ORDER. We already know how vulnerable patients can be; we invisibly protect them on a daily basis from all kinds of dangers inside and outside of the hospital. Their safety is our responsibility, and we practically kill ourselves to ensure it at all costs. But it’s also our responsibility to guard the practice of medicine from people who would hijack our tools of healing for their own political or monetary gain.

In recent years, we have been abject failures in this responsibility, and untold numbers of people have gleefully taken advantage of that. Silently allowing a politician to manipulate our medical decision-making for the purposes of an ideological goal erodes any tiny scrap of trust we might have left.

It comes down to this: When the community has failed a patient by voting an ideologue into office…When the ideologue has failed the patient by writing legislation in his own interest instead of in the patient’s…When the legislative system has failed the patient by allowing the legislation to be considered… When the government has failed the patient by allowing something like this to be signed into law… We as physicians cannot and must not fail our patients by ducking our heads and meekly doing as we’re told.

Because we are their last line of defense.


Reprinted with the kind permission of John Scalzi at Whatever.scalzi.com.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 7

Next

Comments
TheFuckOffKid

TheFuckOffKid

NEWSWIRE

Australia

MAR 31, 2012 02:54 AM

This is Whoopi "It's not rape rape" nonsense all over again.

Calico

Calico

New Zealand
April 2007

MAR 31, 2012 03:07 AM

I'm not sure it's even possible to get this thread back on topic, but I found this quote from Amy Tan really moving, and here seemed as good a place as any to share it:


I am shaped by three generations of sexual abuse, but I am not victim to it.

My grandmother, a widow with two children, was raped by a rich man and forced to become his 3rd concubine. Shortly after the baby from that rape was born, she killed herself.

My mother's first husband would not allow her to leave the marriage. He raped her at gunpoint and had her jailed for running away. In the years before she could leave him, she had three abortions, Meanwhile, he raped school girls.

When I was 15, I was counselled by a youth minister for reading Catcher in the Rye. He threw me on the bed and molested me, then said that I shouldn't read dirty books because it would make people believe I had a dirty mind. In my early 20s, when I was very ill, a gynaecologist sexually abused me, and when the nurse walked in, shocked, she left when the doctor told her to. How could I accuse a youth minister who would say I had a dirty mind? How could I accuse a doctor who would say his abuse was normal medical procedure?

The epilogue: The youth minister ran off with a teenager and when he returned with her, he was not charged with paedophilia or statutory rape. He simply lost his job. The gynaecologist's long history of sexual abuse led one woman's husband to blow up his boat with him in it. He survived and eventually lost his job, then went to work as a doctor at a live porn theatre.

What has all of this done to me psychologically? I am not suicidal like my grandmother was. I don't live in constant rage as my mother did. But I do have hair-trigger reactions to religious self-righteousness that would decide whether a woman has a dirty mind in her own bedroom, that would force a woman to be vaginally probed --humiliated and punished--before she is permitted to have an abortion, even for rape.

These mad men want to take us back to the days of my grandmother and mother, when women had no say. I write stories to give my grandmother and mother their say. "Tell the whole world," my mother said when I told her what I was writing. "All these years, no one knew what we suffered," she said, crying. "Tell the world what happened to us." I am joining millions who will vote, not just for Barack Obama, but with force and unity against the megalomaniacs who get off imagining what women do and should do in bed.


Bill_the_Cat

Bill_the_Cat

New Zealand
May 2005

MAR 31, 2012 07:44 AM

Selene said:
(I think) there is a difference between an assault that involves a "safe" space with a concerned medical expert and an assault where the person doing the assaulting is trying to cause as much mental, emotional, and/or physical pain as possible.



Then you need to change your thinking, because there is no difference. Except that, perhaps, state sanctioned rape leaves the victim with absolutely no options for justice.

mydogfarted

mydogfarted

Oakland, NJ
June 2003

MAR 31, 2012 08:37 AM

TheFuckOffKid said:
This is Whoopi "It's not rape rape" nonsense all over again.



IDGAS

IDGAS

Portland, ME
March 2004

MAR 31, 2012 10:14 AM

I would think that after the physical injuries have healed the psychological pain of being violated by an acquaintance or person of trust are harder or more lasting than those from a stranger. The stranger can be rationalized away as a random event and behavior will change to try and lower the risk of occurrence. And while the fear will likely linger there are still people to trust. Who does someone ever trust again when they are raped by someone who is supposed to care for her.

I would hate to be a woman who has made the difficult decision to abort to then know I will have an eight inch probe put in me, told about the development of the fetus, instructed to view a sonogram, listen to a state mandated list of possible side effects that may or may not be relevant to my health, or required to make more than one trip to a clinic to have a legal medical procedure performed.

I'm glad I am not a woman but it sucks to have a wife, mother, sister, and female friends who do have to deal with the bullshit involvement from the state in their lives.

Thistle

Thistle

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

MAR 31, 2012 10:43 AM

Selene said:

Now, a transvaginal ultrasound is perform in a medical office that can be considered relatively safe and performed by a doctor who is sympathetic to your concerns, more often than not I was asked to do the insertion of the wand myself, when I was ready. The procedure lasts between 2-5 minutes and the doctor does everything they can to make you feel as comfortable and painless as possible.



It's obviously not a safe space if you are being violated in it. Add to that that the admitted purpose of these laws is to make women go through something uncomfortable and upsetting before they can get an abortion, and it is a very intentional violation. Rape does not have to be painful to be rape.

People are welcome to disagree, but I think those two situations are VERY different and none of my experiences with the various form of assault can even compare to that in my mind (not speaking for anyone else or how they would compare their experiences).



They are different to YOU. They are not different in the eyes of the law and they are not different to survivors. My use of the word rape is perfectly valid and you were incorrect in disputing it.

And Psyche was correct, the thing being used in the assault can be anything, but (I think) there is a difference between an assault that involves a "safe" space with a concerned medical expert and an assault where the person doing the assaulting is trying to cause as much mental, emotional, and/or physical pain as possible.



Not all rapists are trying to cause as much pain as possible. You're really generalizing about a lot of things. And by the way, doctors can and have raped their patients in the "safe" space of an examination room before.

And, as I've said before, no one's feelings are invalid, regardless of circumstances.



You say other people's feelings are valid but that some kinds of rape aren't rape.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAR 31, 2012 11:07 AM

That stranger rape, date rape, and coerced transvaginal ultrasounds are all sexual violations--all rape--isn't really disputable. I don't think it can be disputed that they're all substantively different from each other, either, despite all being clearly classifiable as the same thing. Rape itself is a fairly narrow concept, but it can be set in a wide array of circumstances. The circumstances can bring other issues to the table, but they don't change the basic nature of the act. If someone wants to say that the circumstances of stranger rape are worse than the circumstances of a coerced transvaginal ultrasound, well, that's not a wholly unreasonable assumption (though it might be wrong for some, many, or most victims). The act itself, though, is just as wrong in any circumstance.

Thistle

Thistle

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

MAR 31, 2012 11:23 AM

motorfirebox said:
If someone wants to say that the circumstances of stranger rape are worse than the circumstances of a coerced transvaginal ultrasound, well, that's not a wholly unreasonable assumption (though it might be wrong for some, many, or most victims). The act itself, though, is just as wrong in any circumstance.



It's not an unreasonable assumption, I guess, but it is extremely undermining and invalidating to victims of "less bad" rape.

Psyche

Psyche

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

MAR 31, 2012 11:25 AM

FBI's definition of rape: the penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of a victim. (This also covers coercion).

Also note that even slight penetration was covered, so the fact that it lasts only 1 to 2 mins doesn't make a lick of difference.
The comparison to rape hasn't just been made on this board either. Its also been made by numerous politicians and news stations too. Here is an example of an article that does just that: http://mobile.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/02/virginia_ultrasound_law_women_who_want_an_abortion_will_be_forcibly_penetrated_for_no_medical_reason.html

Considering I have read survivor stories about how even TSA patdowns can trigger tearful flashbacks of their rape, I can easily see how a vaginal ultrasound could be equated to rape too.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAR 31, 2012 11:38 AM

Thistle said:

motorfirebox said:
If someone wants to say that the circumstances of stranger rape are worse than the circumstances of a coerced transvaginal ultrasound, well, that's not a wholly unreasonable assumption (though it might be wrong for some, many, or most victims). The act itself, though, is just as wrong in any circumstance.



It's not an unreasonable assumption, I guess, but it is extremely undermining and invalidating to victims of "less bad" rape.


It can definitely be used that way, if one chooses to focus on the circumstances rather than the act. There are times--determining criminal sentencing, for instance--when the circumstances are something that should be taken note of, but there are not very many times when the circumstances should overshadow the act.

The problem is, it's fairly natural to view the circumstances as part of the act. There are reasons for that--and reasons why it's incorrect--but that's a different discussion. Regardless, for someone who has not taken the time to develop the paradigm in themselves that rape is rape is rape, comparing a medical procedure to rape boggles their tiny little minds. Articulating the difference between rape and the circumstances of the rape is a way to build a bridge of reasoning from their position to yours.

Selene

Selene

SUICIDEGIRL

Oregon, USA

MAR 31, 2012 11:44 AM

Bill_the_Cat said:

Selene said:
(I think) there is a difference between an assault that involves a "safe" space with a concerned medical expert and an assault where the person doing the assaulting is trying to cause as much mental, emotional, and/or physical pain as possible.



Then you need to change your thinking, because there is no difference. Except that, perhaps, state sanctioned rape leaves the victim with absolutely no options for justice.



I have only made a distinction with the ultrasound, that is the only situation where I think the line is blurry, no other situations...in the 1 instance where a woman would be coerced into the procedure and where the doctor is coerced into performing it, that is the one and only situation that I am in a grey area on...who is the rapist? The doctor, even though they were coerced as well? The State for passing the law or the guy who drafted the law? Or all of them? it would certainly be assault that is by no means acceptable and would very likely cause mental, emotional and possibly physical trauma; and it is insane that it was ever proposed (but luckily rejected). I'm not qualifying/quatifying anything except this particular instance.

Selene

Selene

SUICIDEGIRL

Oregon, USA

MAR 31, 2012 11:50 AM

Psyche said:
FBI's definition of rape: the penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of a victim. (This also covers coercion).

Also note that even slight penetration was covered, so the fact that it lasts only 1 to 2 mins doesn't make a lick of difference.
The comparison to rape hasn't just been made on this board either. Its also been made by numerous politicians and news stations too. Here is an example of an article that does just that: http://mobile.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/02/virginia_ultrasound_law_women_who_want_an_abortion_will_be_forcibly_penetrated_for_no_medical_reason.html

Considering I have read survivor stories about how even TSA patdowns can trigger tearful flashbacks of their rape, I can easily see how a vaginal ultrasound could be equated to rape too.



It sounds like the law wasn't considering the fact that a person can be raped without penetration, such as forced oral given or touching that could be sexual in nature, but the laws are constantly changing...

Serene

Serene

SUICIDEGIRL

Oregon, USA

MAR 31, 2012 11:50 AM

Morgan said:

Selene said:

Calico said:

wildswan said:
Selene, you have the wrong idea about what the comments made to you are about, and what the take away of all of this should be for you.



This. Creating hierarchies of trauma in regards to rape is a pointless and insulting exercise.



There are hierarchies for everything that could ever be categorized, regardless of content. I also never said that feeling trauma, regardless of circumstance, was invalid or didn't "count" as much as other types. By saying there is a difference depending on the level of intimacy and intent I am not saying that anything "less than" doesn't mean the situation was any less awful.



For fucks sake, rape is NOT something you need to define by heirachy here, especially when you are continuing to hurt survivors (myself included by the way) with your continued ignorant and offensive posts on this subject. The right thing to do would have been to take a step back and think critically about your posts here but you seem more invested in "winning" an argument than you are in listening to what people are telling you.



Quoted for truth.

Psyche

Psyche

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

MAR 31, 2012 11:55 AM

Selene said:

Psyche said:
FBI's definition of rape: the penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of a victim. (This also covers coercion).

Also note that even slight penetration was covered, so the fact that it lasts only 1 to 2 mins doesn't make a lick of difference.
The comparison to rape hasn't just been made on this board either. Its also been made by numerous politicians and news stations too. Here is an example of an article that does just that: http://mobile.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/02/virginia_ultrasound_law_women_who_want_an_abortion_will_be_forcibly_penetrated_for_no_medical_reason.html

Considering I have read survivor stories about how even TSA patdowns can trigger tearful flashbacks of their rape, I can easily see how a vaginal ultrasound could be equated to rape too.



It sounds like the law wasn't considering the fact that a person can be raped without penetration, such as forced oral given or touching that could be sexual in nature, but the laws are constantly changing...



The law actually covered oral penetration. Legally speaking, touching, fondling, and other forms of contact falls under molestation or sexual battery, a different type of sexual assault than rape. (Although catherine comins has argued for broadening the definition of rape since such forms of molestation can be just as traumatic)

Selene

Selene

SUICIDEGIRL

Oregon, USA

MAR 31, 2012 12:05 PM

Most people have been using the legal definition of rape to be the determining factor as to why a penetrating ultrasound is rape as compared to experience and the effects of having one done, which is incredibly legitimate. Keep in mind that spousal rape wasn't considered as being "rape" in the legal sense until fairly recent times, at least recently in the scope of all rape laws...and according to the FBI, per Psyche's post, the laws still don't consider non-penitrative sexual acts as being raped, even though I would say that having oral sex performed on you against your will is still rape because of the nature of the act. Side note, when I said that that the person doing the act wants to cause as much pain as possible, I didn't say it was limited to *physical* pain, emotional and psychological are just as bad...and a rapist could be trying to inflict any combination of those types.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 7

Next