The problem of patient sexual abuse at the hands of doctors has reached the point where it can no longer be ignored and covered up. It is encouraging to see mainstream media tackling this issue by bringing it to the public’s attention. But it is not surprising that patient sexual abuse has become a problem of such proportions when considering the medical community’s opinion of a woman’s right to privacy and dignity. Media coverage has also brought to light the unethical practice of medical students practicing pelvic exams on anesthetized women without the women’s knowledge or consent. In addition, doctors routinely pressure women into vaginal and breast exams without first offering informed consent, thus placing women in vulnerable positions and increasing their exposure to sexual abuse.
Links to media coverage of patient sexual abuse:
Part One: http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2012/12/09/toronto-ontario-doctors-sexual-abuse-discipline.html
Part Two: http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2012/12/10/toronto-ontario-doctors-do-no-harm.html
Part Three: http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2012/12/11/toronto-ontario-doctors-signs-do-no-harm.html
Thanks for helping to increase awareness
I was thrilled to see CBC news covering this topic as it most often is ignored, so it was my pleasure to post it here. Thanks for your comment Katie
Personally, I’ve always believed the “requirements” (that were never, by the way, clinical requirements) for the Pill amounted to abuse/assault. If doctors banded together and decided they’d refuse to prescribe Viagra until men agreed to a completely unnecessary genital exam, how long do you think that would last? When I was 20 in 1978 almost all doctors were male and the “requirements” placed around the Pill were frightening…the profession knew the only “actual” clinical requirements were a blood pressure test and a review of your medical history. (they also knew women who use the Pill are mainly under 40 and many are very young, even teenagers)
If you look at transcripts from the Medical Board, well, one of the things they do to decide whether a doctor’s conduct is appropriate, is to consider whether a certain exam was clinically necessary. In one hearing an older male doctor was facing a complaint of sexual misconduct after allegedly trying to kiss a patient who’d refused a pap test. (she wanted the Pill)
The doctor in his Defence mentioned another of his patients – this 23 year old patient asked him for the Pill, he refused to prescribe it without a pap test, she left and returned later for the test. (after her boyfriend apparently, pressured her) The test result is “abnormal”, the young woman is referred for “treatment” and later sends the doctor some flowers for saving her life. A common story…and it is a story.
There is no doubt in my mind this young woman had a false positive result and was over-treated, yet the false positive serves to scare this woman into future compliance. Added bonuses: she is less likely to complain about the coercion, she might tell other woman about her “scare”, pressure and advise others, “the pap test saved my life”..”it’s a good thing the doctor pressured me” (normalizing coercion) and of course, the doctor looks like a hero.
The Board said the patient (who said the doctor tried to kiss her) was entitled to refuse a pap test…yet they said nothing about the doctor’s practice of requiring pap tests before prescribing the Pill or letting women leave with no Pills…simply because they’ve exercised their legal right to refuse elective cancer screening. The Board ignored the elephants in the room. What does that say to you about the system?
The fact the doctor mentioned the 23 year old patient in his Defence shows how comfortable he was admitting he refused women the Pill until they had pap tests, he knew the system permitted it or conveniently looked the other way. This was a sound assumption as the Board made no comment about the appropriateness of that conduct. The complaint about his conduct was dismissed by the way – his word against her word.
IMO, the promotion of opportunistic screening, linking the Pill to screening, (a “requirement”) and permitting that to happen, screening targets and target payments to GPs means consent itself becomes a blurry concept in practice. Our rights and bodies can then be safely violated and it exposes women to all sorts of predatory dangers….with a system that protects the program and doctors.
Elizabeth, great example of how women can be taken advantage of by drs. I have copied and pasted a portion from the link you had provided in a previous post:
“Evidence considered by the NSC showed cervical cancers among women under 25 were extremely rare and most abnormalities clear up on their own. Screening this group would mean a high number would be unnecessarily referred for further investigation, leading to anxiety, the committee said.”
The false positives from pap tests are extremely high among young women, and then when a biopsy is done the tissue scraped/punched from the cervix is destroyed. This renders it impossible to prove there was nothing wrong with the cervix in the first place. It is important to keep in mind that cervical cancer is EXTREMELY RARE in this age group. So in the scenario you posed above, the young woman is traumatized twice; first when the dr attempts to kiss her, and then when she is scared into further humiliating procedures after receiving a false positive pap result. The dr however, gets away with the abuse and also ends up looking like a hero. Very frustrating indeed.
Patient sex abuse? Isn’t that the definition of “gynecology”?
Our society doesn’t respect women to begin with. Sexual abuse is a matter of degree: rape, medical rape, medical “treatment”, just plain using a woman for consensual casual sex, porn/stripping/prostitution. At least two of those are legal even though they all do emotional harm to a person.
I was thinking about a hypothetical situation the other day. If a woman I barely know offers me sex, should I say yes or no? At first, I think of the trouble it could cause in my own life. But even if I don’t care about myself, what about her? How would it affect her self esteem years later to have one more person treat her like a soulless object?
Sexual “abuse” is often relegated to something extreme that only a “criminal” would engage in, which leaves open the possibility for lots of disrespectful treatment on the part of so-called “decent” people. The “decent” people need to wake up, because often the way they treat people is not so decent.
We have received some disturbing cases from women who were coerced into having pap smears and rectal exams without consent. I encourage you to look at important information every one should read about sexual misconduct by doctors at http://www.sexualmisconductbydoctors.com/resources.aspx.
Patients who are under anesthesia are very vulnerable. A female patient could be sexually abused if she was under anesthesia for hand surgery. It is not just gynecology that you have to worry about. We need to fight for the rights of a family member or personal advocate not employed by the medical facility to be present with patients for surgeries.
Look at some horrible patient modesty violation cases on our web site at http://patientmodesty.org/modesty.aspx.