Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Tattoo? No help for you!Follow

#1 Feb 16 2007 at 6:56 AM Rating: Good
*****
14,454 posts
Christian pediatrician denies child service because parents are tattooed
Quote:

BAKERSFIELD - A family is turned away by a local pediatrician, they say because of the way they look.

The doctor said he is just following his beliefs, creating a Christian atmosphere for his patients.

Tasha Childress said it’s discrimination.

She said Dr. Gary Merrill wouldn’t treat her daughter for an ear infection because Tasha, the mother, has tattoos.

The writing is on the wall—literally: “This is a private office. Appearance and behavior standards apply.”

For Dr. Gary Merrill of Christian Medical Services, that means no tattoos, body piercings, and a host of other requirements—all standards Merrill has set based upon his Christian faith.

“She had to go that entire night with her ear infection with no medicine because he has his policy,” Tasha Childress said.

Merrill won’t speak on camera, but said based on his values and beliefs, he has standards that he expects in his office.

He does that, he said, to ensure the patients he does accept have a more comfortable atmosphere.

According to the American Medical Association and other doctors, he reserves that right.

“In the same sense that any other business person has the opportunity to decline service, be it a restaurant if they’re not dressed properly, be it any other type of business,”
said Dr. Ronald Morton, Kern County Medical Society.

Morton said certain ethics apply if a person’s life is in danger, but besides that, there is no requirement to serve anyone they don’t approve of.

“I felt totally discriminated against, like I wasn’t good enough to talk to,” Tasha Childress said, “like he didn’t have to give me any reason for not wanting to see my daughter because I have tattoos and piercings.”

17 News found other patients who had a different experience with Merrill.

“I have tattoos, actually, and no, nothing’s ever been said about it,” Brandi Stanley said, Merrill’s patient.

Childress’ insurance company, Health Net of California, who referred her to Merrill, said in a statement: “We provide our customers with a wide breadth of doctors that meet certain medical quality standards … If a customer doesn’t feel comfortable with a particular physician, it is our responsibility to provide that customer with access to another doctor who does meet their needs.”

But that’s not enough for Childress who wants the policy changed immediately and an apology from the doctor for making her feel like an outsider.

“Really, it didn’t matter what he didn’t want to see us for. It isn’t right,” she said.

If you have a story idea, mail it to 2120 L Street, or submit it at KGET.com by clicking on “Your Stories.”

Merrill said he will continue to enforce the rules he has in place, which even include no chewing gum in his office.

He said if they don’t like his beliefs, they can find another doctor.


This article made me pause. I can understand that a person has his or her right to create their own rules of conduct in their business, but frankly, I'm surprised that a child was denied service because of her parents, shall we say, adornments. While I disagree with it, I could possibly see the other side of the argument if it were service for the parents themselves, especially for an ear infection. But this doctors decision does seem to go against the Christian teachings of helping one in need, especially an innocent child, based on opinions of the parents. While one may disagree with tattoos and piercings, is it really right to deny medical service to their family because of this personal opinion?

Also, while it may be a private practice, to compare it to a restaurant seemed a little odd. There is a huge difference in services rendered between the two. One you go to as an alternate for creating and eating food in your house. It's a place of pleasure and enjoyment. The other is where you go when you need medical help, when you are hurting and need someone who is educated in determining what is wrong and licensed to give medication to help ease suffering.

#2 Feb 16 2007 at 7:05 AM Rating: Good
***
3,118 posts
If the problem was that dire, she is always welcome to take the kid to the emergency room. Yeah, the doctor is a **** but it's his right to be a **** so the lady can just f'uck right the hell off. People have way too large a sense of entitlement this day and age. I hope something truly awful happens to this indignant *****.
#3 Feb 16 2007 at 7:13 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,829 posts
Boy, talk about punishing a child for the sins of her parents.

Ear infections can be hell for little kids. Emergency room visits are expensive and often not covered by insurance for non-emergencies. So that little girl spent a night in agony for something that was not her fault and not her problem.

What a di'ckhead.
#4 Feb 16 2007 at 7:21 AM Rating: Decent
**
703 posts
DSD wrote:
Christian pediatrician denies child service because parents are tattooed
Quote:

BAKERSFIELD - A family is turned away by a local pediatrician, they say because of the way they look.

She had to go that entire night with her ear infection with no medicine because he has his policy, Tasha Childress said.

He said if they don't like his beliefs, they can find another doctor.



Why in the world didn't she take her daughter to another doctor? I think it's utterly disgusting that she used her daughter's suffering to make a statement. I don't agree with what the doctor did, but her actions were far worse by not getting medical treatment for her daughter. I hope CPS gets after her.
#5 Feb 16 2007 at 7:21 AM Rating: Good
Yes it is not fair that the child was turned down because of her parents looks. If he wants a squeaky clean "atmosphere" in his office for his good Christian brothers and sisters, not much you can do, it is his practice.

Just give the guy an earful if it makes you feel better and then move on to one of the 14,000 other doctors in the State.

My question is, what would have happened if he turned them away because they are black?
#6 Feb 16 2007 at 7:22 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
He's a dick in his attitude but, unless the girl was in need of immediate emergency care and he refused her, I guess he has the right to be a dick.

I could argue his religious principles but, at the end of the day, they don't matter. I'm sure he'd be a dick regardless. While the restaurant analogy is a little 'off', he could easily be compared to a lawyer's office or a CPA or any number of professional offices you don't go into for fun times.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#7 Feb 16 2007 at 7:35 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
His attitude has nothing at all to do with being a Christian. Jesus would pin his ears back for his behavior, in fact.

That being said, I suppose doctors don't swear the Hippocratic Oath any more. Medicine is a business now, and as such he has a right to pick and choose his clientele.

And her parents didn't take her to another doctor or the ER because their HMO wouldn't cover it. Business, like I said.


____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#8 Feb 16 2007 at 7:37 AM Rating: Good
*****
14,454 posts
I agree whole heartedly that the parents should have gone to see another doctor or worst case, visit the ER. Even if the insurance company does not fully cover things like ear infections, you do what you have to do for a child. Ear infections can be one of the most painful things to go through for a child.

Originally I was going to bring up the Hippocratic Oath, but actually this aspect is not covered in it, and also it seems to be unused nowadays when being sworn in as a physician. However, The World Medical Associationwhich our country is affiliated with, now uses the Declaration of Geneva
Physician's Oath
which states:


At the time of being admitted as a member of the medical profession:

* I solemnly pledge myself to consecrate my life to the service of humanity;
* I will give to my teachers the respect and gratitude which is their due;
* I will practice my profession with conscience and dignity; the health of my patient will be my first consideration;
* I will maintain by all the means in my power, the honor and the noble traditions of the medical profession; my colleagues will be my brothers;
* I will not permit considerations of religion, nationality, race, party politics or social standing to intervene between my duty and my patient;
* I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from the time of conception, even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity;
* I make these promises solemnly, freely and upon my honor.


Would this issue then be covered by this oath?




Edited, Feb 16th 2007 10:38am by DSD
#9 Feb 16 2007 at 7:38 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
The modern version includes "I will treat all who seek my ministrations."
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#10REDACTED, Posted: Feb 16 2007 at 7:38 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) We know she's not black or she would have cried racism. Just another white trash ***** who thinks the world should revolve around her, an all to common occurrence in todays society.
#11REDACTED, Posted: Feb 16 2007 at 7:41 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) DSD,
#12 Feb 16 2007 at 7:46 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
DSD wrote:
Would this issue then be covered by this oath?
More practically, is there legal recourse for not following the oath? Does the state pull your your medical license if you fail to respect your teachers and maintain the honor of your profession?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#13 Feb 16 2007 at 7:46 AM Rating: Decent
While I have tattoos (visible, forearms, lower legs, back, I have come to expect a certain amount of backlash because of them. It limits my options in my job field, creating a preconceived notion about myself and potentially my work. While this isn't fair or even legal, it does happen. It happens all over the country.

While the AMA may say that it's well within his rights to refuse health care, it makes me wonder when the Pharmacist who refuses to carry birth control, the gas stations refuse to carry condoms, the Doctors refuse medical care, all because of beliefs, where does it stop?

Will Teachers refuse to teach a child that has a (because it's convenient) Muslim up-bringing and she/he is of a Christian background?

Will Police stop a murder investigation because they had piercings and that goes against their beliefs?

I just think it's the first step on a long flight of intolerance.

Edited, Feb 16th 2007 9:54am by Kaelesh
#14 Feb 16 2007 at 8:06 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Kaelesh wrote:
it makes me wonder when the Pharmacist who refuses to carry birth control, the gas stations refuse to carry condoms, the Doctors refuse medical care, all because of beliefs, where does it stop?
When the law says it stops, I guess. The pharamacist issue is still being debated both privately and in the courts. Gas stations certainly are not required to carry condoms.
Quote:
Will Teachers refuse to teach a child that has a (because it's convenient) Muslim up-bringing and she/he is of a Christian background?

Will Police stop a murder investigation because they had piercings and that goes against their beliefs?
Assuming you mean the teachers at PS 277 and not the ones at St. Monica's, it's not really valid to compare private and state employees.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#15 Feb 16 2007 at 8:13 AM Rating: Decent
Jophiel wrote:
Kaelesh wrote:
it makes me wonder when the Pharmacist who refuses to carry birth control, the gas stations refuse to carry condoms, the Doctors refuse medical care, all because of beliefs, where does it stop?
When the law says it stops, I guess. The pharamacist issue is still being debated both privately and in the courts. Gas stations certainly are not required to carry condoms.
Quote:
Will Teachers refuse to teach a child that has a (because it's convenient) Muslim up-bringing and she/he is of a Christian background?

Will Police stop a murder investigation because they had piercings and that goes against their beliefs?
Assuming you mean the teachers at PS 277 and not the ones at St. Monica's, it's not really valid to compare private and state employees.


Mearly extreme examples. But yet, on the Teachers example, we all know it could very well happen in the public sector. Hatred and Intolerance gets disguised pretty well. They could simply say that the Student has had "problems" in the classroom and have them removed. I expect nothing less in this country.
#16 Feb 16 2007 at 8:21 AM Rating: Decent
*
180 posts
I would like to know why the parents waited until there was a problem to have an established doctor. Usually, if you get new insurance and have to switch doctors, you make an appointment just to fill out paperwork and get all the basics, so if there is a problem later then you have less hassle. And you can meet the doctor and make sure you are comfortable with him. While this is not as important for adults, if you have children it is a must! So the child should not have suffered for the adults past decisions, but the parents were also stupid for not finding a doctor earlier.
#17 Feb 16 2007 at 8:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Kaelesh wrote:
But yet, on the Teachers example, we all know it could very well happen in the public sector. Hatred and Intolerance gets disguised pretty well. They could simply say that the Student has had "problems" in the classroom and have them removed. I expect nothing less in this country.
Well, if it's 'disguised' then it's a different story than the doctor's overt gesture of saying "Get the fuck outta here with those tattoos." Anyone, be it educator or law enforcement or doctor or lawyer or telephone repair guy, could intentionally do a shitty job due to prejudice. I'm not sure how you could really address that in any sweeping reform.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#18 Feb 16 2007 at 8:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
HazelEyedDragn wrote:
I would like to know why the parents waited until there was a problem to have an established doctor.
"...Childress’ insurance company, Health Net of California, who referred her to Merrill..."

My guess is that the kid got sick, the parents called their insurance to see who locally would take their coverage and they were sent to Merrill. Depending on their policy, they may not have had the luxury of cherry picking physicians. Anyway, they may have recently moved, changed policies, their old physican retired or was arrested, etc. Who knows?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#19 Feb 16 2007 at 8:31 AM Rating: Decent
Joph, I think it's a more of a social quagmire then an area of the law that needs sweeping reform. All though in the case of the OP, perhaps some look into his practice and the laws that surround it might not be a bad thing.
#20 Feb 16 2007 at 8:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I took your slippery slope arguement to mean that you felt something needed to be done to curb it. I'm just saying that many overt instances of intolerance are already outlawed and, as for covert instances, well, people will always be assholes.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#21 Feb 16 2007 at 8:53 AM Rating: Decent
Christians are being self-absorbed, bigoted, overzealous, and judgmental again? Well I am fucking shocked! Smiley: rolleyes
#22 Feb 16 2007 at 8:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Jophiel wrote:
DSD wrote:
Would this issue then be covered by this oath?
More practically, is there legal recourse for not following the oath? Does the state pull your your medical license if you fail to respect your teachers and maintain the honor of your profession?


No; and that's my point. Medicine used to be regarded as a sacred trust. Now it's a business. /shrug
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#23 Feb 16 2007 at 9:07 AM Rating: Good
****
6,730 posts
Jacobsdeception the Sly wrote:
If the problem was that dire, she is always welcome to take the kid to the emergency room. Yeah, the doctor is a **** but it's his right to be a **** so the lady can just f'uck right the hell off. People have way too large a sense of entitlement this day and age. I hope something truly awful happens to this indignant *****.


QFT

I'm suprised she isn't sueing. If it's an emergency go to the emergency room meanwhile get a new fUcking doctor, this one don't like you, sheesh.
#24 Feb 16 2007 at 9:10 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
If the guidelines are posted clearly, or you have to acknowledge them in writing (I once went to an OBGyne that made me sign a paper saying she wouldn't give me the pill due to her religious beliefs on the first visit, I never went back), then you really just need to acknowledge that this is not the doctor for you and move on. Call your insurance and say he's refusing to treat, and you need an alternative. They are obliged to provide one.

I understand you're upset, but quit talking about you and how you feel like an outsider blah blah. It's not about you, dummy. I would say this mother's more interested in a crusade than the well-being of her kid. That child's probably still got that damn ear infection.
#25 Feb 16 2007 at 9:24 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,735 posts
Samira wrote:
His attitude has nothing at all to do with being a Christian. Jesus would pin his ears back for his behavior, in fact.


Jesus didn't die for everyone's sins, ya know; only the ones that were...uh...christian already despite his jewishness!
#26REDACTED, Posted: Feb 16 2007 at 9:31 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Kaelesh,
« Previous 1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 321 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (321)