Page 147 of 148

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 15 Nov 2020, 21:25
by Pham Nuwen
Residents are stupid and not to be trusted. Sorry T. It is what it is.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 15 Nov 2020, 21:25
by Aresen
Team thoreau, Pham & Number 6.

OTOH, I'd love to see Dr. Calhoun's reaction if some conservative doctor refused to treat a patient because they were a socialist.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 15 Nov 2020, 21:27
by Pham Nuwen
I mean it's a resident. They're almost human sometimes but don't let the exterior fool you.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 02:50
by lunchstealer
A:

Team T, Pham, and Seis.
Pham Nuwen wrote: 15 Nov 2020, 21:27 I mean it's a resident. They're almost human sometimes but don't let the exterior fool you.
B: this confirms the biases I picked up at college with a bunch of MD-larva.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 03:33
by Eric the .5b
Apparently the attending was fine with it, and quite a few supposed MDs in the replies falling all over themselves to agree with her. I'd think if this were some verboten thing for her not to take a patient at seeing something like this on their record, she'd be getting more friction than not being able to get all the doctors to put together some sort of "statement" about racism.

Myself, I've sat in a waiting room for six hours waiting for my oncologist to deign to even show up, then sat for an hour in an exam room with yachting magazines scattered around before seeing the doctor for five minutes—and those times aren't even exaggerations. In my job, I've met with doctors who got irate that I wouldn''t live-edit a production medical software system to suit their particular wishes and so kicked me out of their office for trying to take notes on what they wanted changed about the software. I'm not impressed by this doctor following these threads, but "Does not want to be racially abused" doesn't even ping on the shitty doctor scale for me.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 07:48
by Pham Nuwen
What people do and say publicly is one thing and behind closed doors another thing. Shrug.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 10:42
by D.A. Ridgely
This is just another example of what Dave Chappelle calls a brittle spirit. Would she refuse to treat patients with Tourette's? If the obnoxious patient was nonetheless just PC enough to scream "Fornicating N-Words!" would that have triggered her any less?

Once she's completed her residency she can go practice anywhere she wants and can refuse to take anyone as a patient for pretty much any reason or no reason at all. Having undertaken care, even if she did so under orders, she has a professional obligation to continue care, though there would be nothing wrong with having her attending put someone else on the case if the attending agreed. Posting her fragility online is unprofessional regardless of however the political winds of social justice happen to be blowing for now.

A known murderer or serial killer comes in the ER, he gets treated. Same with a spouse abuser. Same with a rapist, a child molester, a terrorist. If you're not willing to take on that ethos, worse yet, if being called names suffices to keep you from behaving in a responsible, professional manner toward the patient in front of you, then yes, you're in the wrong business. Go into research or teaching or set up a practice where there's near zero chance of such a patient coming your way again. And keep your whining off social media.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 11:25
by thoreau
Adding to what DAR said, what gets me is not just that she rejects the ethos of treating even the odious, but that she rejects it in the one context where the patient's odious behavior might be a tragic symptom rather than a character flaw.

If he really is a bigot in even his lucid moments then there are obvious reasons why she might not be the best person to develop a relationship with him and talk him through his mental health issues. But no nurse ever got to say "That patient is a sexist" and shift the work around.

More importantly, there is a difference between a sensible shuffling of assignments and announcing that she won't subject herself to odious behavior from psych patients, of all people. He's a psych patient. He's arguably the most vulnerable person in the hospital. Depending on the situation he might be legally subject to coercive terms that nobody in, say, the oncology ward is subject to. He might be completely untethered from reality. And she is announcing that she doesn't want to treat him.

She isn't some intern doing a one month rotation in a field she will never again work in. She's a psychiatry resident who publicly announced that she won't treat patients who are out of control and say absolutely terrible things. She voluntarily chose the field where you have to give patients the most benefit of the doubt for their behavior, the field where you treat them because of their inappropriate behavior rather than in spite of it. And she publicly announced that it is unreasonable for her to have to treat the crazy asshole saying offensive shit. That's like signing up for urology when you find dicks triggering.

Twitter is the wrong venue for her education and chastisement, but someone needs to sit her down and explain that psychiatry is about treating people because they are out of control, not in spite of it.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 11:39
by dead_elvis
lunchstealer wrote: 16 Nov 2020, 02:50 A:

Team T, Pham, and Seis.
Pham Nuwen wrote: 15 Nov 2020, 21:27 I mean it's a resident. They're almost human sometimes but don't let the exterior fool you.
B: this confirms the biases I picked up at college with a bunch of MD-larva.
This confirms the biases I picked up from Dr. Cox and Dr. Kelso.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 13:34
by Eric the .5b
Pham Nuwen wrote: 16 Nov 2020, 07:48 What people do and say publicly is one thing and behind closed doors another thing. Shrug.
I accept I may have been wrong about the ethics, but professional standards people will spurn in public, but not in private, are a new one on me.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 14:14
by lunchstealer
dead_elvis wrote: 16 Nov 2020, 11:39
lunchstealer wrote: 16 Nov 2020, 02:50 A:

Team T, Pham, and Seis.
Pham Nuwen wrote: 15 Nov 2020, 21:27 I mean it's a resident. They're almost human sometimes but don't let the exterior fool you.
B: this confirms the biases I picked up at college with a bunch of MD-larva.
This confirms the biases I picked up from Dr. Cox and Dr. Kelso.
I have also heard MDs saying that Scrubs is the single most accurate medical drama in the history of fiction.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Nov 2020, 14:38
by thoreau
Eric the .5b wrote: 16 Nov 2020, 13:34
Pham Nuwen wrote: 16 Nov 2020, 07:48 What people do and say publicly is one thing and behind closed doors another thing. Shrug.
I accept I may have been wrong about the ethics, but professional standards people will spurn in public, but not in private, are a new one on me.
That's a fair point, but the professional standard in question here is politically dangerous at the moment. "Even racist patients deserve your care" (a stronger statement than "Even racist patients deserve care from someone") is politically dangerous during a national reckoning over race. So at the moment a wise clinical faculty member would publicly say "We value the mental and emotional safety and well-being of our residents, especially residents of color, and would never subject her to..." while privately saying "OK, don't you ever go out there again and announce who you won't care for."

And I guarantee you that the nurses hate that resident. Because they never get to say "I'm not going to deal with the out of control psych patient shouting odious things." I mean, OK, they can say it, but their next sentence had better be "Anyway, been nice working here, time to polish my resume."

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 18 Nov 2020, 08:04
by dbcooper
Now my cat is an actual good Reddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nowmycat/

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 21 Nov 2020, 14:44
by thoreau



Re: Twitter!

Posted: 21 Nov 2020, 16:38
by Eric the .5b
...Nah. Letting as many of those idiots die off now probably helps us in the next pandemic.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 21 Nov 2020, 17:09
by thoreau
Eric the .5b wrote: 21 Nov 2020, 16:38 ...Nah. Letting as many of those idiots die off now probably helps us in the next pandemic.
Yeah, but it's still an amusing image.

Use our biggest party animals as influences to combat antivaxxers. "Party people what's up? Got my vaccine and I am ready to party!"

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 21 Nov 2020, 17:15
by Eric the .5b
thoreau wrote: 21 Nov 2020, 17:09
Eric the .5b wrote: 21 Nov 2020, 16:38 ...Nah. Letting as many of those idiots die off now probably helps us in the next pandemic.
Yeah, but it's still an amusing image.

Use our biggest party animals as influences to combat antivaxxers. "Party people what's up? Got my vaccine and I am ready to party!"
It sounds more about neutralizing the most egregious super-spreaders than anything to do with messaging.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 21 Nov 2020, 21:31
by Ellie
Because I had to see it, you all do too


Re: Twitter!

Posted: 21 Nov 2020, 21:45
by lunchstealer
I see your batshit incoherent power fetishish art and raise you JEB!


Re: Twitter!

Posted: 22 Nov 2020, 10:25
by Warren
Ellie wrote: 21 Nov 2020, 21:31 Because I had to see it, you all do too

Needs a key

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 22 Nov 2020, 11:36
by Highway
Warren wrote: 22 Nov 2020, 10:25
Ellie wrote: 21 Nov 2020, 21:31 Because I had to see it, you all do too

Needs a key
I've think I've got most of them: L-R Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi, the-one-I-don't-know, Michelle Obama, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 22 Nov 2020, 11:40
by thoreau
The one you don't know is almost certainly Kamala Harris, but the weird lighting makes her seem pale. Which is ironic since she is celebrated for being anything but pale.

Meanwhile, I appreciate this tweet.


Re: Twitter!

Posted: 22 Nov 2020, 12:00
by Warren
Highway wrote: 22 Nov 2020, 11:36
Warren wrote: 22 Nov 2020, 10:25
Ellie wrote: 21 Nov 2020, 21:31 Because I had to see it, you all do too

Needs a key
I've think I've got most of them: L-R Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi, the-one-I-don't-know, Michelle Obama, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ruth Bader Ginsburg
thoreau wrote: 22 Nov 2020, 11:40 The one you don't know is almost certainly Kamala Harris
Why does Kamala get a halo I wonder?
The absence of HRC is telling. Not sure of what exactly, but it must be something.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 22 Nov 2020, 12:07
by Ellie
lunchstealer wrote: 21 Nov 2020, 21:45 I see your batshit incoherent power fetishish art and raise you JEB!



This one is baffling to me! Like, the actual tweet seems funny and then his follow-up seems serious? I can't decide if he's that butthurt or that bad at humor. Birth require an order of magnitude that seems impossible

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 22 Nov 2020, 12:08
by Ellie
Also, it doesn't matter how many times I see that Twitter name, I can't stop reading it as "rate my sky per room"