[kingoni]

On 15th October 2016; I saw a locum doctor. I made some comments/compliments about my usual GP (lets call her Dr A), and how she really helped me during such a painful time in my life.

Apparently, the locum doctor recorded some/all of these comments as "cause for concern".

Despite this, I saw my regular GP 2 weeks after this on the 28th of October, and she would have obviously seen the issues flagged by the locum GP and yet still saw me, and made no reference to it at all. She treated me totally the same as usual, and was not different.
I had a very bad experience with a psychiatrist who was very inappropriate with me, and I called her a malignant c***. I then burst into tears, and Dr A said:

"I am so sorry things have been so tough on you." She didn't tell me off, or criticise me, or rebuke me etc.
I did not go back to the surgery until 3 months later, 20th January. Although I made the appointment with Dr A, I instead saw Dr C who is a male GP.

he said:
"I know you were supposed to see Dr A, but I thought it best you saw a male GP in the meantime."

I confessed to him that on the 28th october I used a curse word about a psychiatrist. Dr A had not mentioned it to anyone, and had not written it down.
The ONLY reason for me seeing him was due to the comment(s) flagged by the locum GP. Which I thought was very weird, given that I saw Dr A, the "victim" 2 weeks AFTER the "incident."

I also thought it very odd that I was only to see a male GP, did they think I was going to make a pass at any/all female staff? I thought this was discriminatory on his part.

Dr C had discussed the issue with Dr A.
Dr A said:

"During any and every appointment, Tony has never done anything that gave me cause for concern, or raised a red flag."
So in essence then, the "victim" did not make the complaint....did not contribute to the complaint....and yet still I was not to see her....or any other female doctor.

I feel very badly let down, I feel like the doctors have been gossiping about me, and have discriminated against me, violating my trust in the process.

[possum220]

Doctors are going to communicate with each other about their patients if they have concerns. It not gossiping. Yet it's not nice when they seem to back each other up. I am sorry you feel betrayed.

Doctor A did not let you down.

You seems to have been given a full explanation of what conversations have gone on. Why does Dr C get to make the decision? Is he the boss where Dr A works? I don't live in the UK so I don't know what your options would be. I trust that some-one who does live in the UK can help you with some form of resolution.

[kingoni]

I know Dr A didn't let me down.

I feel that they have been rather discriminatory. So if there is an issue with one female doctor, I am therefore considered a potential "threat" to any female doctor? That is why I feel betrayed by the service.

They did not explain if I was now allowed to see Dr A after the conversation and after we had "cleared the air" or if she was uncomfortable with seeing me now, etc etc.

Dr C was a senior partner in the practice, but I must reiterate the following point:

There are 5 GPs, 3 of which are female; so if I am only to see a male GP only, then that means I am suffering a reduction of 60% of the medical coverage which in turn will most likely give me a delay in my medical treatment. Given that this would have been due to my sexual orientation (as a heterosexual man) and or my gender, this is itself a very discriminatory, illegal and unethical thing to do.

As a direct result of the sheer panic and unhappiness I have felt over the way I have been treated, I self-harmed AND had to get an emergency prescription for Diazepam from another doctor in the hospital. Perhaps the GPs can "communicate those concerns" with each other. Seeing as they are the ones ****ing responsible for it.

Any doctor you encounter will discuss and communicate your case.

[kingoni]

Originally Posted by justafriend306

Any doctor you encounter will discuss and communicate your case.

Fair enough. But that does not in my mind clarify this heavy-handed approach they have adopted, or the discriminatory practice imposed whether that was in the short term, or to be imposed indefinitely.

Given that I am the patient, surely it is, under the doctrine of informed consent, vital that I made aware of relevant information that directly affects my treatment?

[Gojamadar]

Hi Toni,
Doctors are very much overworked and overstretched in the Uk. They usually allocate patients to the doctor most suited to deal with the case.
They probably done you a favour by making you see a male doctor as he is more likely to understand your problems.
Perhaps you're too apprehensive about your behaviour? In any case, if you need a doctor urgently you can ask for the earliest available date -with any other doctor.

Actually they don't need your consent. As long as they are all on your case they can discuss it freely amongst themselves.

You seem anxious and concerned about your behaviour which goes to conclude that the doctor change may have been warranted.

[Fuzzybear]

I'm also from the UK.. as mentioned above, doctors are very much over stretched in the UK.........

I wish you well

[kingoni]

Originally Posted by justafriend306

Actually they don't need your consent. As long as they are all on your case they can discuss it freely amongst themselves.

You seem anxious and concerned about your behaviour which goes to conclude that the doctor change may have been warranted.

That would have been the case with a male doctor, female doctor, a giant carrot cake, or a teletubby. That is the nature of an anxiety disorder, we second guess ourselves where even where it is manifestly and objectively not our fault. A case in point. During a consultation with a MALE doctor in hospital, who was examining my chest, I had a spasm in my leg and my arm shot out to balance myself. I was reaching for the desk/table (nearest surface, and wanted to use that to anchor myself) and at that he had stood up, probably to either move out of the way, and or assist me.

My hand briefly and lightly grazed his leg for a nanosecond. Cue a frantic and near panicked monologue from me that it was an accident, etc etc.

So you see, gender does not matter. Social anxiety (which I suffer from profoundly) means that the displeasing of authority figures, whomever they maybe, is absolutely terrifying for someone like myself. Did I intend to touch the male doctor? No. Was I flirting with him? Nope. Was it an accident, and objectively so, to a trained professional, and probably to a non-medical person? Yes and yes. But even so, my anxiety kicked into overdrive.

Perhaps the doctor change was warranted. But as I said, they have not conducted themselves very professionally, they have not properly explained the reasoning behind this decision and have left in such vague, ambigious terms, and phrased in a way that seemed very discriminatory (all of which are here in the UK clear ethical violations of the fitness to practice requirements of the regulatory body for doctors, the GMC).

The professional standards here in the UK (where I live in, and where these issues have arisen in) clearly state that where a doctor needs to terminate the patient-doctor relationship, they must clearly do so in writing unless, and in exceptional circumstances, it would cause unnecessary and severe harm to the patient and or would pose a risk to the safety of the doctor. Given that the lack of some sort of concrete, objective explanation has in fact magnified the stress I have experienced, and given that I have absolutely no violent tendencies or indeed any sort of anger management/rage issues; it would seem then they have fallen somewhat short of these clearly expressed, solidly required and legally demanded obligations.

And THAT is the cause of my frustration, in that they have not respected my rights as a patient, or their obligations as doctors.

[Molinit]

Your "rights" as a patient have been respected. They had a discussion colleague-to-colleague and decided the best course of action. Just because you don't agree and you now feel shame or whatever, that's on you to decide what you wish to do.

And FYI, doctors in the US also discuss patients with each other and as long as other patients don't hear, it's perfectly fine. I have heard things you wouldn't believe - and as doctors' staff, I was allowed to hear it if it had something to do with the work I was doing.

[mugwort2]

No idea how important this is but I don't understand what a locum doctor is. Never saw this term before. How relevant, important is to know what it is. I'm hoping the replies you received were helpful to you.

[possum220]

I do feel for you. Establishing an emotional connection with a doctor isn't easy. Having it taken away without being involved in the decision making s u c k s.

Is it worth maybe showing the post, where you refer to the teletubby, to Dr C? Maybe it would give him a clearer picture in asking for further consideration in the hope that he may change his mind?

"The professional standards here in the UK (where I live in, and where these issues have arisen in) clearly state that where a doctor needs to terminate the patient-doctor relationship, they must clearly do so in writing unless, and in exceptional circumstances, it would cause unnecessary and severe harm to the patient and or would pose a risk to the safety of the doctor."

Might be time for you to ask for further clarification on the above. Do they think you are going to harm a doctor or are a risk to yourself?

[kingoni]

Originally Posted by Molinit

Your "rights" as a patient have been respected. They had a discussion colleague-to-colleague and decided the best course of action. Just because you don't agree and you now feel shame or whatever, that's on you to decide what you wish to do.

And FYI, doctors in the US also discuss patients with each other and as long as other patients don't hear, it's perfectly fine. I have heard things you wouldn't believe - and as doctors' staff, I was allowed to hear it if it had something to do with the work I was doing.

No, they have not been respected.

The blanket imposition of a male only policy is paternalistic and disproportionate, and seems to be on the basis of either my sexual orientation as a heterosexual male and or my gender. That is discriminatory. That would be the same as saying, "doctor will only see white patients only, blacks not allowed."

The exemption to this would be where there was a justifiable reason for this, and as I have already stated elsewhere, the definition of the UK here of what constitutes a justifiable reason is very narrow and very narrowly interpreted. As someone with a legal background, I should know these salient issues.

Even if there was a concern about a breakdown in my relationship with ONE doctor, there would be no objectively justifiable reason for the imposition of a prohibition of my contact with any female doctor unless for example, I posed a danger to them, or the sight of them would for example, trigger a psychotic episode. Neither of these two issues are on the table.

Furthermore, here in the UK, I would be legally entitled to recieve formal, written notification (a warning letter if you will) as to the reasons why I was considered a violent/abusive patient, unless such information would manifestly cause a risk of immediate, imminent harm to the staff. With no history of violence documented to anyone, ever, period, at any time of my life, it would seem this exceptionally unlikely.

Where a doctor acts in a manner, that would be likely to contribute and or worsen an already pre-existing medical condition, this is grounds for clinical negligence. By virtue of the fact that the lack of proper communication for the reasoning behind this autonomously reached decision, this was materially and directly contributed to an anxiety disorder which I already have, thereby satisfying objectively the requisite conditions of a pre-existing condition.

Therefore, due to the aforementioned points, delineated above, I would argue that they have NOT "respected my rights as a patient."

One final note. Here in the UK, doctors may decide that a patient SHOULD recieve life-saving treatment for example, surgery or a blood transfusion. They can discuss that among themselves until they are blue in the face but, if the patient possesses legal capacity to withdraw consent to treatment, then the doctors cannot legally impose treatment and would be required then to respect the patients wishes to discontinue treatment even where the patient could be saved, and the patient would die as a result.

Any attempt by medical personnel to force treatment in such a situation would become grounds for assault, and grounds for them losing their job. Again, just because they THINK they know best, does not automatically give them the right to impose their will, no matter how many of their esteemed colleagues "back them up."

[Gojamadar]

Originally Posted by mugwort2

No idea how important this is but I don't understand what a locum doctor is. Never saw this term before. How relevant, important is to know what it is. I'm hoping the replies you received were helpful to you.

Hi,
A "locum" is a doctor who stands in for the ususal doctor when he or she is on holiday or absent from the practice.

[mugwort2]

Gojamadar: Thanks for explaining a locum doctor who stands in for the regular doctor when he or she is away.

[mugwort2]

I feel sorry for you. I know from personal experience how hard it is to establish a patient doctor relationship. Of course I don't mean buddy buddy but one where both of you are comfortable. I find this especially true of pdocs. I know the feeling. It does sound a real disappointment to you.

[eskielover]

What I gradp is that YOU ARE THE ONE who said something that raised the concern then came to hsve that CAUSED them to reach the conclusion they did & make the change they felt was appropriate GIVEN YOUR comment that gave them concern.

In most practices where thete are many doctors, all are available to be assigned to whatever patient is best suited to them.

If you made a comment that made the practice uncomfortable allowing you to see a femsle doctore it is THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to takr the action necessary to protect their doctors from whatever you said that made them feel that action was necessary even if nothing had occured at the tkme, there WAS something YOU SAID that made them feel this action was best fir all concerned.

Our reactions to things like that IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY as we are responsible for our own choices, actions & behaviors.

I am sorry that you ended up is such a situation. Maybe if you get some better clarification, you can understsnd what behavior you spoke about & chsnge so that situstions won't arise like this for you in the future. Use it as a learning experience.

[kingoni]

Originally Posted by Gojamadar

Hi,
A "locum" is a doctor who stands in for the ususal doctor when he or she is on holiday or absent from the practice.

Originally Posted by eskielover

What I gradp is that YOU ARE THE ONE who said something that raised the concern then came to hsve that CAUSED them to reach the conclusion they did & make the change they felt was appropriate GIVEN YOUR comment that gave them concern.

In most practices where thete are many doctors, all are available to be assigned to whatever patient is best suited to them.

If you made a comment that made the practice uncomfortable allowing you to see a femsle doctore it is THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to takr the action necessary to protect their doctors from whatever you said that made them feel that action was necessary even if nothing had occured at the tkme, there WAS something YOU SAID that made them feel this action was best fir all concerned.

Our reactions to things like that IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY as we are responsible for our own choices, actions & behaviors.

I am sorry that you ended up is such a situation. Maybe if you get some better clarification, you can understsnd what behavior you spoke about & chsnge so that situstions won't arise like this for you in the future. Use it as a learning experience.

Incorrect.

Utterly incorrect.

That was tantamount to discrimination. As I have repeatedly stated, the simple truth of the matter is that a doctor cannot discriminate against a patient on any grounds such as gender, age, sexuality, race etc etc; unless there is clear, justifiable grounds to do so, an actual genuine, legitimate risk of violence and or harm occurring to either staff and or patient.....

Furthermore, these concerns for the practice that you so piggishly spoke of, are somewhat undermined by the inconsistency of their response and the time frame. The comments were made on the 15th of October, and I saw the doctor to whom the comments concerned on the 28th of October. The practice would have had the power and even the obligation to refer me to a male GP, cancel the appointment etc etc, but they did not. It was only 3 months later, after I had made any contact with any of them, that the issue was THEN raised.

It should be noted that the psychiatrist whom I saw is currently under investigation and pending possibly losing her medical license due to the comments and remarks that she made to ME. That resulted in a full blown nervous breakdown, a suicide attempt, and numerous admissions to hospital as a vulnerable adult under police escort for my own safety. So I have most certainly been damaged by a DOCTOR.

So, I have had more than my fair share of inappropriate, uncomfortable behaviour at the hands of doctors, you know, those people whom you seem to so pompously defend to your semi-literate abilities.

Appropriate behaviour is a sword that cuts both ways, and indeed a compelling argument that due to the power imbalance it is THEY, the DOCTORS, who are to be held to a higher standard than the patient(s).