'Pregnant' man stuns medical profession

[Passions71203]

I know a lesbian who has genital warts. She went to a PCP for a check up and mentioned some problems in the female area and the PCP said, "Oh well it's good that since you're a lesbian we know it's not an STD."

stupid doctor...

 

[Piglets Mommy]

It happens more often than you'd think, and often in subtle ways. For example, my last PCP refused to give me a referral to a gynocologist because he though that I'd never had "real" sex. Nevermind that I was 23 at the time - his personal prejudice lead him to give me care that wasn't as good as a straight woman would have gotten.

That is so sad. Do they not treat Nuns either (they would supposedly have NO sex) I guess if you don't have "real sex" you can't get cervical cancer, ovarian cancer, breast cancer, fibroids, or a multitude of other medical conditions that have absolutely nothing to do with sex, but a lot to do with being female????( I know, men can get breast cancer too, I'm just trying to imagine what on earth could make ANY Dr . think that a woman doesn't need a referral to an OBGYN based on her sexuality)

This thumbs up was given to the person who said why didn't they adopt.. Sorry, I can't find that exact post...Just wanted to say that it would probably be very difficult for people like them to adopt...I was often asked why I didn't adopt..Because no one would have let me

I thought the same thing too...It is so hard for many people to adopt anyway...add GLBT to the mix and it gets even harder. (Although on the surface this couple would look like a "traditional" couple, most adoption agencies to tons of reasearch, and they would probably be discriminated against.)

 

[cteddiesgirl]

I didn't say anything about "feelings" we have the free exercise of religion in this country...here's a quote from the article

""Doctors have discriminated against us, turning us away due to their religious beliefs. "

how is the free exercise of your religion discrimination?

as I said before, we have to respect EVERYONE's lifestyle, even the ones we do not agree with (in this case religious people)

If we have to respect everyone's lifestyle, then how come those doctors couldn't repect this couple's lifestyle?

actually, yes the pregnant person said in the article many doctors turned them away due to their religious beliefs...


I think thats a legitimate reason and should not be considered discrimination

It's still discrimination.

Just like it used to be against one's beliefs to treat black people as human beings is actually discrimination.
It was considered to be against certain people's beliefs that black people should be intergrated with whites. That was descrimination.

This is no different. This couple and this child, no matter how unusual the circumstances, are still human beings and still deserve to be treated well.

And if those doctors were so religious, wouldn't they be concerend with the child? Why are they not concerned about the child enough to make sure it comes into this world just fine.

Oh. Because it must be a freak and a mistake because the carrier is legally considered a man.

I already answered that.

Obviously it wasn't a clear answer if several of us are questioning it.

So, what are people without a uterus and ovaries?

 

[lillielil]

I know a lesbian who has genital warts. She went to a PCP for a check up and mentioned some problems in the female area and the PCP said, "Oh well it's good that since you're a lesbian we know it's not an STD."

When GF and I got together we decided that we should both be tested for STDs. The doctors seemed to think it wasn't necessary at all because lesbians can't transfer STDs (and I've even had male partners before!) and kind of rolled their eyes while the did the tests. And this was on a university campus where when a straight woman comes in the first thing they think is wrong with her is either an STD or pregnancy!

Of course, it is true that women who have only same-sex contact have much lower rates of STD transmission, but it is still possible, and given that the medical community seems blind to it (and I've read studies that lesbians have lower rates of going to the gynecologist than straight women) I wouldn't be surprised if STDs go untreated more often in lesbians.

It's really disgusting how uninformed medical professionals can be. It shouldn't be the patients' job to educate them!

(I've still never been to the gynecologist. I'm afraid I'd get more of the same crummy treatment I did from my PCP.)

 

[cteddiesgirl]

How do you classify the 1 in 200? Or should we (as suggested earlier in this thread by another poster) do away with sex/gender classifications? Do they serve a practical purpose anymore? Maybe we should just use a percentage. If you're more than 50 percent "female" bits, you're female. But are we really ready to turn 10s of thousands of years of history on it's head? Perhaps in the future, we can correct this anomaly through genetic manipulation. That of course assumes people believe it's a genetic defect.

As I've asked before, why can't there be a choice of "both"? Or come up with a completely different and appropriate term.

 

[Tigger&Belle]

It's really disgusting how uninformed medical professionals can be. It shouldn't be the patients' job to educate them!

(I've still never been to the gynecologist. I'm afraid I'd get more of the same crummy treatment I did from my PCP.)

That really stinks.

 

[Piglets Mommy]

As I've asked before, why can't there be a choice of "both"? Or come up with a completely different and appropriate term.

Or can we just do away with the entire gender classification??? Can you imagine the discrimination one would get after being pulled over for speeding with a classification of "both" on their driver's license???

Does it really matter if someone is "Male" or "Female" for anything?

Can we just have one calssification of "Human"?

 

[StrollPatrolMom]

well with as many children in the system needing to be adopted, I think they should let people like them adopt.

I agree....any stable loving parent or set of parents is preferable to being bounced around foster or group homes...far preferable.

 

[StrollPatrolMom]

It's still discrimination.

Just like it used to be against one's beliefs to treat black people as human beings is actually discrimination.
It was considered to be against certain people's beliefs that black people should be intergrated with whites. That was descrimination.

and on the flip side, its discrimination to force a doctor into treating a patient who violates his religious beliefs which he is legally protected from exercising under the Constitution.

I guess my biggest issue with this whole thing is ultimately it boils down to a lesbian couple having a baby, and really whatever that doesn't bother me...what bothers me is its being successfully turned into a way to "push" an agenda. I support equal "rights" for gay couples...I do not support having an agenda shoved down my throat that if you have a religious or moral objection to homosexuality that you are a bigot...which has been stated several times in this thread. I'm a live and let live kind of person and what happens in your bedroom is your business...it doesn't need to be splashed all over the place as front page news (something this couple sought out by granting interviews and making media deals) and you do not need to force people to accept your lifestyle if you are unwilling to accept theirs.

 

[PghLybrt]

and on the flip side, its discrimination to force a doctor into treating a patient who violates his religious beliefs which he is legally protected from exercising under the Constitution.

I guess my biggest issue with this whole thing is ultimately it boils down to a lesbian couple having a baby, and really whatever that doesn't bother me...what bothers me is its being successfully turned into a way to "push" an agenda. I support equal "rights" for gay couples...I do not support having an agenda shoved down my throat that if you have a religious or moral objection to homosexuality that you are a bigot...which has been stated several times in this thread. I'm a live and let live kind of person and what happens in your bedroom is your business...it doesn't need to be splashed all over the place as front page news (something this couple sought out by granting interviews and making media deals) and you do not need to force people to accept your lifestyle if you are unwilling to accept theirs.

Its sad that our "agenda" is that we want Doctors to do their job and treat us.

Should they have just remained silent? We should not publish anything in magazines and newspapers such as the Advocate?

 

[Tigger&Belle]

and on the flip side, its discrimination to force a doctor into treating a patient who violates his religious beliefs which he is legally protected from exercising under the Constitution.

I guess my biggest issue with this whole thing is ultimately it boils down to a lesbian couple having a baby, and really whatever that doesn't bother me...what bothers me is its being successfully turned into a way to "push" an agenda. I support equal "rights" for gay couples...I do not support having an agenda shoved down my throat that if you have a religious or moral objection to homosexuality that you are a bigot...which has been stated several times in this thread. I'm a live and let live kind of person and what happens in your bedroom is your business...it doesn't need to be splashed all over the place as front page news (something this couple sought out by granting interviews and making media deals) and you do not need to force people to accept your lifestyle if you are unwilling to accept theirs.

Being g/l is hardly a lifestyle.

 

[StrollPatrolMom]

Its sad that our "agenda" is that we want Doctors to do their job and treat us.

Should they have just remained silent? We should not publish anything in magazines and newspapers such as the Advocate?

should they sell their story to the highest bidder? makes me wonder about their motivations...moreover no research on the impact of the testoterone on the eggs, and they go ahead anyways. They had other options. They shopped around and found a doctor. I had to shop around and find a doctor myself due to my holistic views...was I discriminated against? hardly...I think its a good idea to find someone to treat you who views are in line with your own. Ive been through FOUR pediatric praticies because some of my views aren't mainstream, was I discriminated against? my non-mainstream views are lifestyle choices...so is that discrimination?

 

[StrollPatrolMom]

Being g/l is hardly a lifestyle.

being gay, perhaps not but opting to live as a gay couple is...just like my choice to get married was a lifestyle choice.

I think an extremely religious person could also make the case their religion is not a lifestyle choice either.

Its a matter of perspective.

 

[PghLybrt]

should they sell their story to the highest bidder? makes me wonder about their motivations...moreover no research on the impact of the testoterone on the eggs, and they go ahead anyways. They had other options. They shopped around and found a doctor. I had to shop around and find a doctor myself due to my holistic views...was I discriminated against? hardly...I think its a good idea to find someone to treat you who views are in line with your own. Ive been through FOUR pediatric praticies because some of my views aren't mainstream, was I discriminated against? my non-mainstream views are lifestyle choices...so is that discrimination?

Did your doctor tell you that you made him uncomfortable and because of such he would not treat you?

And I really do not think telling their story to the Advocate was "selling it to the highest bidder".

 

[Tigger&Belle]

being gay, perhaps not but opting to live as a gay couple is...just like my choice to get married was a lifestyle choice.

I think an extremely religious person could also make the case their religion is not a lifestyle choice either.

Its a matter of perspective.

Very true that whether or not a person acts on being gay is a choice and I'm living through that firsthand right now, however ignoring it doesn't make it go away. Trust me, if I could ignore it and who I am would change I'd do it in a heartbeat. But the reality is that people are who they are, and lying (or even not admitting) about sexual orientation hurts everyone involved. It's not a lifestyle.

 

[joestv]

I'm not sure if anyone's posted this link. But this is the article written by this person in the latest issue of the Advocate that I received this week.

http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid52947.asp

 

[PghLybrt]

I'm not sure if anyone's posted this link. But this is the article written by this person in the latest issue of the Advocate that I received this week.

http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid52947.asp

Yep thats the one. You just got it this week! I have had it now for at least 2 weeks . Sorry off topic.

 

[Disney Doll]

It happens more often than you'd think, and often in subtle ways. For example, my last PCP refused to give me a referral to a gynocologist because he though that I'd never had "real" sex. Nevermind that I was 23 at the time - his personal prejudice lead him to give me care that wasn't as good as a straight woman would have gotten.

I hope you reported him to the State Board.

 

[joestv]

Yep thats the one. You just got it this week! I have had it now for at least 2 weeks . Sorry off topic.

I went to the website to find the article and it already has the new latest issue! I didn't know I was getting mine late!

I thought it would add more to the discussion if people read the first person account.

 

[Disney Doll]

I know a lesbian who has genital warts. She went to a PCP for a check up and mentioned some problems in the female area and the PCP said, "Oh well it's good that since you're a lesbian we know it's not an STD."

When GF and I got together we decided that we should both be tested for STDs. The doctors seemed to think it wasn't necessary at all because lesbians can't transfer STDs (and I've even had male partners before!) and kind of rolled their eyes while the did the tests. And this was on a university campus where when a straight woman comes in the first thing they think is wrong with her is either an STD or pregnancy!

Of course, it is true that women who have only same-sex contact have much lower rates of STD transmission, but it is still possible, and given that the medical community seems blind to it (and I've read studies that lesbians have lower rates of going to the gynecologist than straight women) I wouldn't be surprised if STDs go untreated more often in lesbians.

Well, if it is any consolation to you, it is not just lesbians that may be "undertreated" by doctors.

I have cared for many religious people (priests & nuns) who displayed the classic symptoms of some diseases (including STDs) or health statuses, which, when I pointed that out to their MD, the response I got was "How could he have AIDs? He's a priest!" or "How could she be pregnant? She's a nun".

My response was always "And a human being, subject to the same types of physical issues as any other human being is subject to. I'm not here to make a moral judgment about the fact that Fr.Priest has AIDs or Sr.Nun is pregnant. I'm here to help Fr.Priest get the help he needs to manage his disease or have Sr.Nun get approriate pre-natal care".

You see alot in 25 years of nursing. Just when you think you've seen it all, someone comes up with something new!