[Vision2020] John Brown's body . . . of thought

[Joan Opyr]

Dr. Brown wrote (in part):

"Our Vision statement was motivated by a desire to have our practice be completely devoted to Christ.  In light of that, what would you folks like to have your Doctors think about as they go about their trade?  While not asking exactly to have y'all rewrite our vision statement, what sort of things do you think such a statement should say?  What kind of a Doctor would you like to have, if you could design one?"


First, I apologize to Dr. Brown for changing the subject line.  I'm sorry; I get in these funny moods, and I can't resist temptation.  Perhaps that's why I have a sinus headache?

Okay, joking aside.  Your question, Dr. Brown, is provocative, and I'd like to answer it seriously.  When Melynda and I moved to Moscow in 1993, we knew that we wanted to start a family, and so we knew that we wanted a gay-friendly doctor, a well-trained doctor, and a man or woman of courage, compassion, and patience.  We are ourselves people of faith, but we did not seek a physician within either of our faith traditions.  Melynda is a Quaker, and I am a Jew.  If religion had been part of our medical search criteria, we'd now be treating ourselves with leeches, ear candles and voodoo dolls.  In truth, we would have been fine with an ethical atheist.

It is important to both of us that we have a doctor who embraces germ theory rather than the punishment-for-sin theory of disease.  We like our doctor because he listens, he's patient, he's kind, and he's one hell of a diagnostician.  We trust him completely.  This isn't to say that we wouldn't get a second opinion if we disagreed with him or felt that he was in some way slipping -- if he began taking less time to listen and diagnose, or began practicing that conveyer-belt method of patient care that seems all too common these days.

Your faith, Dr. Brown, is not an issue for me.  But, as I recall, Christ the Physician did not pause to assert that health care was not a right before healing people, nor did he restrict his care to those who were Jewish.  (I refer you to Matthew 15:21 and following.)  I should also like to say that I most certainly *would* have a problem with a physician who excused himself and his shoddy diagnoses with a breezy, "Ah, well, that's why Christ died on the cross, isn't it?  To forgive us all our sins.  La, la."  

Please note: I am not accusing you, Dr. Brown, of doing any of these things.  I am simply making an observation, or, rather, a series of observations.  What's important to me in a doctor?  The precedence of germ theory over sin theory, and the vital need to recognize that Christian forgiveness does not negate the necessity of good medical practice and careful diagnosis.  God might forgive doctors their trespasses, but patients need not be quite so understanding.

One more thing: I need to feel 100% confident that my doctor is not sharing my private medical information with any third parties, be they his preacher, his spouse, or the elders of his church.  To refer back to Rose's original post, if I were a woman in a patriarchal, federal husband kind of church, I'd want to be damned sure that my doctor was consulting with me and me alone, not with my minister nor yet with the hypothetical husband to whom I was in submission.  The choice about whether or not to share medical information belongs with the patient, not with her doctor, not with her preacher, and not with her federal husband.  

Medical confidentiality.  It's not just good practice; it's the law.

Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
www.auntie-establishment.com