Is it right to sexually assist a paralysed patient? - page 15

How do you deal with the paralysed patient with frequent erections? Have you ever been asked to assist? I've never faced this but have seen a heated discussion on another forum. Is it humane to bring... Read More

  1. by   Spidey's mom
    Deb, your intuition was right on. I mentioned this to my husband tonight and he said "that is crazy".

    Pay attention to the woman with smiling blue eyes . . . ..

    steph
  2. by   caroladybelle
    Quote from Roland
    1. No, I probably wouldn't provide these services. Nor, when I really think about it would I be comfortable with my SO doing these things. On the other hand if I wasn't married, and if the "services" involved only women I might consider it (but the "client" could do far better for their money). If people in the world were limited by the services that I was willing and able to provide it would be a dark, place to live.

    2. With regard to legal issues all we need do is look at how this is being DONE in other countries like Austrialia. There are many doctrines of contract law and liablility that could be applied to this or any other novel situation.
    What difference does being married or limiting services to women have to do with providing a "needed health promoting service" to an at need client? What does gender have to do with providing "a physical release" to provide good prostate health to a fellow man, as you have so eloquently posted. There is no emotion or affection involved.

    Or is there???????

    The fact is what these clients are probably in need of, as many people have noted is a 'loving touch or affection'. And that is something that cannot bought or paid for. It also carries a heavy toll/price with it that goes well beyond mere sex or release.

    And you well know it, or you would have no problem providing a "mere release" to a fellow man, and would have no problem with your partner doing so. But for some reason, you do.

    Those men that had frequent sex, did anyone rate their emotional health or whether they were in loving relationships? As depression has been sited as a risk factor for cancer, could the better prostate health be sited as the benefit of having better interpersonal skills/relationships that permit them more sex and loving relationships with others?

    You can pay all the people you want to have anonymous sex with goodness knows who, and that will not provide them with " a loving touch or affection" as that comes only from the soul. And I doubt that even professional prostitutes would be interested in such a proposition, as they rarely even kiss clients as it is too "personal" even for them. Do you think that you could honestly find a large number of ethical moral people, able to pass licensing boards, and pass regular drug/disease tests that would like to do this?

    Since most of us that are caring, loving, generous individuals (as does the public in general)have SOs/partners/spouses/lovers, and even you say that you would not provide these services nor be comfortable with your SO doing so with your consideration of the "torment" and "desperate need" that these individuals have, WHY WOULD YOU THINK ANYONE ELSE WOULD DO SO???????


    And quite bluntly, if the patient has these needs and no one that will satisfy them, they are suffering from much worse problems in their life. A shrink needs to see them to address why there is no one in their life. There are plenty quads/paras/ALS/MS/Parkinson's/Myesthena Gravis patients that have loving relationships in their lives and function quite well. Those without lovers need to work on interpersonal relationships with others. We need to fix the problem not the symptom.
  3. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from caroladybelle
    What difference does being married or limiting services to women have to do with providing a "needed health promoting service" to an at need client? What does gender have to do with providing "a physical release" to provide good prostate health to a fellow man, as you have so eloquently posted. There is no emotion or affection involved.

    Or is there???????

    The fact is what these clients are probably in need of, as many people have noted is a 'loving touch or affection'. And that is something that cannot bought or paid for. It also carries a heavy toll/price with it that goes well beyond mere sex or release.

    And you well know it, or you would have no problem providing a "mere release" to a fellow man, and would have no problem with your partner doing so. But for some reason, you do.

    Those men that had frequent sex, did anyone rate their emotional health or whether they were in loving relationships? As depression has been sited as a risk factor for cancer, could the better prostate health be sited as the benefit of having better interpersonal skills/relationships that permit them more sex and loving relationships with others?

    You can pay all the people you want to have anonymous sex with goodness knows who, and that will not provide them with " a loving touch or affection" as that comes only from the soul. And I doubt that even professional prostitutes would be interested in such a proposition, as they rarely even kiss clients as it is too "personal" even for them. Do you think that you could honestly find a large number of ethical moral people, able to pass licensing boards, and pass regular drug/disease tests that would like to do this?

    Since most of us that are caring, loving, generous individuals (as does the public in general)have SOs/partners/spouses/lovers, and even you say that you would not provide these services nor be comfortable with your SO doing so with your consideration of the "torment" and "desperate need" that these individuals have, WHY WOULD YOU THINK ANYONE ELSE WOULD DO SO???????


    And quite bluntly, if the patient has these needs and no one that will satisfy them, they are suffering from much worse problems in their life. A shrink needs to see them to address why there is no one in their life. There are plenty quads/paras/ALS/MS/Parkinson's/Myesthena Gravis patients that have loving relationships in their lives and function quite well. Those without lovers need to work on interpersonal relationships with others. We need to fix the problem not the symptom.

    OMG . . .that is so beautifully put. Thank you.

    steph
  4. by   Shotzie
    I do think it's interesting the number of people who have replied with accusations suggesting that anyone who is not willing to entertain the thought of performing sexual acts upon patients
    are "prudes", "unenlightened", or "not open to intellectual discussion".

    The fact that we feel strongly that we, nurses, should not be performing these intimate sexual acts on patients does not say that any of the posters are prudes. It does show that there are plenty of nurse who have personal integrity and who ARE truly concerned about the welfare of their patients.

    When you review the pages you will see numerous suggestions as to where these patients can get their needs met, suggestions as to the appropriate referrals that could be made and plenty of nurses volunteering to help the patient and their chosen partner find the quiet place and time for these acts.

    But all the intellectual arguments aside (please Roland, do not respond to this, I have heard all I want about your lengthy opinions, your sex life and your personal relationships) this boils down to the fact that in the US, this kind of action would put you at great personal and professional risk.

    I don't perform sex acts with my neighbor, my brother, my piano teacher or my patients. That's because I know the difference between right and wrong and I am very glad to say that many, many other nurses clearly do too.
  5. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from Shotzie
    I do think it's interesting the number of people who have replied with accusations suggesting that anyone who is not willing to entertain the thought of performing sexual acts upon patients
    are "prudes", "unenlightened", or "not open to intellectual discussion".

    The fact that we feel strongly that we, nurses, should not be performing these intimate sexual acts on patients does not say that any of the posters are prudes. It does show that there are plenty of nurse who have personal integrity and who ARE truly concerned about the welfare of their patients.

    When you review the pages you will see numerous suggestions as to where these patients can get their needs met, suggestions as to the appropriate referrals that could be made and plenty of nurses volunteering to help the patient and their chosen partner find the quiet place and time for these acts.

    But all the intellectual arguments aside (please Roland, do not respond to this, I have heard all I want about your lengthy opinions, your sex life and your personal relationships) this boils down to the fact that in the US, this kind of action would put you at great personal and professional risk.

    I don't perform sex acts with my neighbor, my brother, my piano teacher or my patients. That's because I know the difference between right and wrong and I am very glad to say that many, many other nurses clearly do too.
    Another great post! You guys are so good. Thanks!!

    steph
  6. by   Roland
    Okay, then Shotzie this is not in reply to your thread. But, on the other hand if you don't like what I say simply don't read it or at least don't reply there's no reason to make negative personal statements about me such as "please Roland, do not respond to this, I have heard all I want about your lengthy opinions, your sex life and your personal relationships" Show me where I've said something like that about you personally, and I will sincerely apologize. If there is one thing I take PRIDE in it is in NEVER denigrating people personally (ideas and positions are a different matter).

    In addition, maybe I am just dull, but I don't understand what people are talking about (Smiling Blue Eyes ect) when they talk about being had. Am, I missing something?

    Caroleladybelle, the reason that being married, and limiting services to women matters is because you asked me what I would do (and I didn't say that I would even do this anyway). You asked me about my personal preferences and personally that's how I feel. In the same way I prefer to paint my house blue, drive a Toyota and watch O'Reilly at ten P.M. rather than eight P.M on Fox. However, I don't presume to tell others what THEY should be able to do. In reality my preferences don't matter in the slightest with regard to the strength of the argument Charles Manson, could have a logically correct argument, and the fact that he's nuts, wouldn't in any way change that fact (true, few would listen to him, but I am speaking of logic not human emotion).

    Caroleladybelle, you make a good point about the study. There could be numerous confabulating factors that lead to erronious conclusions. Correlation, doesn't imply causation. However, few would question that most would prefer access to some sort of sex life without regard to it's ramifications from a medical standpoint. I am simply saying that society has no right to prevent them from obtaining that via purchase or otherwise. Also, I know of many "average guys" who lack for the loving relationships you claim are so easy to obtain. It's tough enough for those of us who are "average" let alone someone who can't move most of their bodies. I have a good friend from high school that makes 80K a year working for Verizon, and has over 200K in the bank. He is "dorky" looking and lanky, not to mention shy, but very nice/smart. He is thirty four years old and has never had a girlfriend (he confided to me that if he doesn't find one in the next year or two that's he's going to Nevada so he can at least say he's not a virgin!) If "average" guys like this have trouble finding girls then you seriously mean to tell me that people who are profoundly disabled can usually do so? Of the five or so people I still speak to from highschool who are married FOUR have admitted to me privately that the primary reason that they got married was for regular sex! I truly believe that if prostitution were legal that many if not MOST guys would refrain from marriage until their late 30's or longer. Okay, I'm digressing, but I really am floored how easy you seem to make it seem for people to find "significant others" when they are disabled.
    Last edit by Roland on Apr 7, '04
  7. by   jkaee
    Caroladybelle and Shotzie......brilliant replies!

    They would be my thoughts exactly.....if my kids would allow me to have an uninterrupted thought just once during the day. :chuckle


    Jennifer
  8. by   Spidey's mom
    Roland . . . please take the time to slowly read over what Carol and Shotzie have said.

    Having someone "physically release" a person IS NOT the same as loving someone. Besides, it is called prostitution and it is illegal and in my opinion, immoral. Hey, I'm a wacky feminist and think it is completely degrading to women. And as I so crudely said prior and as my husband is agreeing with . . . . . it is a hard-on and NOT a big deal. Men have them many many times a day for all kinds of reasons. Waking up in the morning having to pee is one . . . .

    "We've been had" relates to our feeling that the OP is a troll who likes to stir up trouble or get his jollies by reading our impassioned responses and we were used!

    steph
  9. by   donmurray
    The OP is an English occupational health nurse who lives in Paris, with 40 posts to their name. Hardly a troll. Is it not intellectual cowardice to demonise someone setting awkward ethical questions that one chooses not to think about?
  10. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from donmurray
    The OP is an English occupational health nurse who lives in Paris, with 40 posts to their name. Hardly a troll. Is it not intellectual cowardice to demonise someone setting awkward ethical questions that one chooses not to think about?
    Nope. I think we all responded quite well and with great detail to his original question and I noted no cowards among the group. We all spoke pretty plainly.

    It is not intellectual cowardice to finally, after all these posts, to wonder about the OP's intentions. Hardly fair to say that we chose not to think about it after all these posts.

    steph
    Last edit by Spidey's mom on Apr 8, '04
  11. by   Roland
    Okay, Stevie Lynn, I'll give you that one. Casual "sex" is not the same or as good as a loving relationship in the same way that a number#3 from McDonalds is not as good (or as healthy) as a balanced meal. However, it beats going hungry when you only have three dollars in your pocket and won't be getting home from classes until eleven at night!

    I guess you could be correct about the "troll" thing, but I don't know what makes you so sure. I guess my point is that it's an important issue without regard to the reasons why the OP made the post.

    Speaking of important issues how can I get this darned site to STOP sending email messages to my personal email account every time there is a response? I've tried changing my personal settings, but it's not working! Am I the only person who has hurt their marriage by posting on this site, and subsequently having emails sent to their account? This thread lead to a serious argument with my wife, and we can't afford extra stress in our lives from things like this right now. I see it as a harmless way to express my love of "debate". She see's it as a waste of time at best, and professional folly at worst. My counterargument that at least I'm not like all my friends who have spent every spare minute the last month watching NCAA basketball doesn't impress her (she said she wishes I did since at least that wouldn't possibly compromise our lives, plans and privacy). As Dr. Phil would might ask "how's that working for you?". It's not BIG time, and if I keep it up I'm going to be in the same boat as all of those disabled people I keep debating about. I see now that I have developed something of a discussion/debate addiction (it's not new, but it hasn't caused this type of conflict in a long time. I'm off the wagon so to speak and it's time to get back on. I keep telling myself that I can confine myself to asking only informative questions that will expand my knowledge of the profession. However, it's starting to seem like the alcoholic who says he can go to the bar and just have a couple with friends).

    I'm done. IF, I could figure out how to deactivate my account before I changed my mind I would.

    What hurts the most is that this means that Fergus will have the last word on our abortion debate.

    One last thing David if you were just yanking our chains then at least admit that's what you were doing. If not then I respect you for bringing up the topic and you are in my personal "free speech" hall of fame.
    Last edit by Roland on Apr 8, '04
  12. by   LPN2BSN
    Not just no...but H*LL NO!

    I don't think I was taught that procedure in nursing school :chuckle
  13. by   stressednurse
    [B]NO not never as the nurse or the aid, the girlfriend or the potential girlfriend or the paid reliver, but never the nurse.

close