A Florida doctor has decided he doesn't want to treat Democrats, at least those who voted for Barack Obama. Florida urologist Jack Cassell posted a sign on his office door telling those voters to go away.
"If you voted for Obama ... seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your health care begin right now, not in four years."
William Allen, professor of bioethics, law and medical professionalism at the University of Florida's College of Medicine said that Cassell's sign is pushing the limits of professionalism.
Allen said doctors cannot refuse patients on the basis of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation or disability, but political preference is not one of the legally protected categories specified in civil-rights law. By insisting he does not quiz his patients about their politics and has not turned away patients based on their vote, the doctor is "trying to hold onto the nub of his ethical obligation," Allen said. "But this is pushing the limit," he said.
No big loss really. Vitals.com, which rates doctors via patient rankings, says Cassell has a 1 out of 4 star ranking. It seems that it might be a good idea to avoid him anyway; he might snip the wrong tube. At any rate, there are a couple of things that Jack Cassell is forgetting in his (modern) Hippocratic Oath. They include:
- I will respect the privacy of my patients (like their political views????) [...]
- I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings (not just certain voters), those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 25
If you have a problem with the new law, pick up a Sign and join a demonstration. do not take it out on your medical clients.
Is it Hippocratic or hypocrite oath?
This is indefensible and the sickos who defend his lack of ethics are just as lame.
Read more: http://www.faqs.org/abstracts/Health/Black-white-disparities-in-health-care-The-Patient-Self-Determination-Act-on-balance-more-help-than-.html#ixzz0k3HuHxSk
After reading about this ahole I see why!!!!!!!!!
2. The doctor in question is not denying anyone emergency care. And in fact stated that he would treat those who voted for Obama if the patients so desired.
3. Although his actions may be offensive to some, and in poor taste depending upon one's views, they are neither unethical nor illegal. It may be considered free speech to which he is entitled.
FYI, the classic Hippocratic Oath does contain the following language: "I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy."
Are you equally offended when doctors violate this portion of the Oath?
-- a physician
Mr. Cassell is guaranteed the right to vote, politic, voice his opinion by law. The practice of medicine, particularly, the hippocratic oath transcends but does not violate law. The modern version of the oath states:
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism
I does not say, as you imply in your #1, that you will apply, for the benefit of those who agree with my politics, all measures that are required...
When you feel you are above the intent of this Oath you have stepped away from art of medicine and have engaged in the practice of law.
Mr Cassell has violated his oath and has stepped away from the path laid out by those who have come before you and Mr. Cassell.
One final point. The Oath states:
If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.
Mr. Cassell should turn in his license. Shame on him.
Be that as it may, I did point out that the physician in question denied care to no one. He did offer to treat those who voted for Obama if that be their choice; he simply suggested that they seek their elective care elsewhere. A suggestion, not a requirement.
It is generally understood (though nowhere stated) that a physician will provide aid to any patient in an emergency situation, but in Dr. Cassell's case it is a matter of elective, non-emergent care.
I may not agree with his actions, but defend his right to do so, as he violated no legal or medical/ethical tenets.
As an American citizen I would lay down my life defending Mr. Cassell's right to his views because if you take it away from him, you can just as easily take it away from me.
I respect all those who practice the art of medicine until I see they do not do it honorably. Mr Cassell has chosen a path that is outside of the art of medicine. This path, although not legally binding, is illuminated by the hippocratic oath. And he appears to have violated the spirit of the oath.