Talk

Flip

1 2 ··· 14 15 16 17 18 19

AIBU?

About this GP

458 replies

slightlyconfused85 · 11/08/2015 15:24

Now before I start I generally think Gps are amazing people, I'm not dissing the profession. Today, however, I booked an appointment to get the contraceptive pill after the birth of my 2nd child. I was given an appointment with a locum who explained my options to me, then said he didn't prescribe contraception for ethical reasons. I then had to wait 45 minutes for another gp to be able to fit me in to prescribe this for me. Aibu to think that if the gp surgery is going to have locums that won't do this then they could have let me know on the phone when I booked? I know the receptionist didn't know what I wanted but they could say if it's an appointment to discuss contraception then say and we will find a different GP. Had loads of time wasted today and feeling (probably irrationally) irritable about it!

OP posts:

Thanks

Report

bumbleymummy · 15/08/2015 21:58

Well yes, but a female doctor refusing to prescribe contraception has the same consequences. Surely your issue is a doctor refusing to prescribe it - not whether that doctor happens to be male or female? Is it somehow better if a female doctor refuses to prescribe it?

Thanks

Report

Welshwabbit · 15/08/2015 22:15

Elke, I know this is a side issue but the law degree at Oxford is called Jurisprudence (I know because I did it). So your point that Cat can't be genuine because she doesn't know what you need to study in order to become a lawyer is not right. Not supporting one side or the other, just thought it was only fair to point that out given that you are accusing her of lying.

On the indirect discrimination point, I can see that employing GP who refuse to prescribe contraception might place women at a particular disadvantage and could potentially be a detriment if that leads to a delay in obtaining the required prescription (e.g. in the circumstances described in the OP). However, the thing about indirect discrimination is that, unlike direct discrimination, it can be justified if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, and I think it likely that a system whereby another GP can be made available to do the prescription would be regarded as justifiable. Refusing to employ (or grant partnership to) GPs who hold these ethical positions could potentially constitute direct discrimination on the ground of religion or belief.

Thanks

Report

ElkeDagMeisje · 15/08/2015 22:42

Welsh I work alongside two Oxbridge graduates, and the topic has never come up. Mainly because we discuss substantive issues at work, not our egos. But if you think that load of drivel is anywhere approaching even first year undergraduate level that is required of an Oxbridge candidate, never mind a barrister, that's a not very funny joke.

Best just ignore him/her and their attempts to derail an important discussion by making it all about them.

Thanks

Report

frumpet · 15/08/2015 22:49

I have come across this many times in the area I work in , we have Doctors who have to undertake gynae experience as part of their practice to become GP's . Some of them choose for ethical reasons not to take part in the actual process of termination . I support them in this even though I disagree with their viewpoint . It does not prevent the termination going ahead. The person going through the process of termination never know's that a particular Doctor is not taking part in their care , or more correctly certain parts of the process of their care , because if the shit hits the fan , they get bleeped regardless .

Thanks

Report

Welshwabbit · 15/08/2015 22:57

I understood the point Cat was making, Elke. I hope that my intellectual capacity isn't judged based solely on comments I type one - fingered on my smartphone! They rarely show me at my best. I spent a lot more time on my Finals essays .