About a month ago, as I was doing my final check on things and getting ready to head home, one of the drs I regularly work with approached me and asked if i wanted to go out for dinner or drinks sometime. I made a joke about my husband probably not appreciating that and he said 'Maybe another time.'. Fast forward a few weeks, and as I'm walking in in the morning he asks if I'm free that night. I politely decline. It has now been about a month and it has escalated to him putting his arm around my shoulder, to him adjusting the card conveniently over my breast to just today him standing behind me as i was bending over and putting his hands on my hips and pulling me against him. I have told him multiple times now that I'm not interested, and would prefer if our relationship was nothing but professional but every time he dismisses me.
My question is, how do I deal with this? I've tried talking to the higher-ups but I was told that I should get over it. This dr has been working here for much longer than me, and is well respected, there is little chance anyone here would take my side over his.
Should I do something, or am I over reacting and should just ignore it?
I'm a psychiatric nurse, I assure you I'm not a 'pansy' nor am I incapable of defending myself physically. If this was a man in a bar or on the street I would've used the defense skills I learnt in training to break his fingers if he laid a hand on me. However I don't want any reason I could get in trouble for this. I don't want him to have anything to use against me at all. If my bosses already dismissed this I wouldn't put it past them to call my defense 'assault'.
Also I'm 5'3 and weight about 100 pounds, he's probably about a foot taller than me and at least 100 pounds heavier, if I'm aggressive with him and he decides to fight back and no ones around (like in the parking garage), I'd be in serious trouble.
Because I've opted to go with someone from HR I'm going to need to wait until Friday.
(Bolding my own)
OP, I can not stress to you enough the importance of bringing someone who is there with YOUR best interests in mind as opposed to just someone from HR, who is employed by the facility, therefore, have the facilities best interests in mind.
I would hate to think of you in a meeting with people railroading you into keeping all this hush/hush, that they are not going to do anything about it, whatever the case may be, and you leaving the meeting with the situation no different, other than you now have to keep your mouth shut about it.
From what you described, most facilities would have put this person on administrative leave pending an investigation. Additionally, because you initially reported it and were told to suck it up--I question the legality of that.
No one seems to be thinking "I will sue the pants off of you" thought process. Nor are you "I will kick butt" and your points regarding having nothing on you are valid and great points. But you do want to be sure that you protect yourself, and that the facility has an obligation to keep you safe.
Interestingly, as a psych nurse, your filter for safety is not a typical nurses. You deal with people every day who are not in their right mind, therefore, you pick and choose your communications carefully, and therapeutically. So what would seem logical to most nurses, is sometimes a little fuzzy to psych nurses, as practice has conditioned one to respond in a way that is in the other person's best interest. So please bring an impartial third party to this meeting. Your union rep is a good thought.
It giantly sucks that the only thing that you want to have happen is to be left alone, and the powers that be seem to have a difficult time making that happen for you.
Specializes in Nurse Leader specializing in Labor & Delivery.
The suit was just kidding. I am not blaming her. When I think of the women in my life, my mother, sisters, wife, etc. I can't imagine this situation persisting so long with one of them. Maybe I am just lucky to be associated with very strong women in my life. I teach my daughter not to allow anyone to put their hands on her unless they are invited to do so and if she becomes a victim to do whatever it takes to prevent herself from being a victim again. I read the OP and It didn't seem to me that her response was aggresive and firm. I don't blame the OP for what happend. I am questioning her response to it.
And frankly, that pisses me off.
By "questioning her response" you are implicitly blaming the victim. You can say you're not, but that's what it is.
The suit was just kidding. I am not blaming her. When I think of the women in my life, my mother, sisters, wife, etc. I can't imagine this situation persisting so long with one of them. Maybe I am just lucky to be associated with very strong women in my life. I teach my daughter not to allow anyone to put their hands on her unless they are invited to do so and if she becomes a victim to do whatever it takes to prevent herself from being a victim again. I read the OP and It didn't seem to me that her response was aggresive and firm. I don't blame the OP for what happend. I am questioning her response to it.
Who are you to "question her response?" And what is wrong with her response?
Just because she didn't kick him where it hurts does not mean that she is responsible for what happened. Again, people react differently under stressful circumstances due to past trauma, socialization, safety concerns, etc. There is no right or wrong way.
And yes, you blamed the victim and should be ashamed of yourself.
Who are you to "question her response?" And what is wrong with her response?
Just because she didn't kick him where it hurts does not mean that she is responsible for what happened. Again, people react differently under stressful circumstances due to past trauma, socialization, safety concerns, etc. There is no right or wrong way.
I'm not fighting PMFB-RN's battles, but you and I just don't see the situation the same.
Nobody said the OP was responsible for what happened to her.
As someone who would have stopped the inappropriate activity in it's tracks on day one, I'm puzzled how anybody would allow it to progress to the physical.
I'm not blaming anybody. I'm not saying anybody's wrong.
It's just so totally out of my nature to let anybody put their hands on me and not go ballistic, I can't get my mind around the fact that the OP didn't.
That's not a judgment. That's not blaming. It's just a matter of two different people, with two different histories, making two different choices.
I question her response just because it's so different from what I would have done.
Who are you to "question her response?" And what is wrong with her response?
Just because she didn't kick him where it hurts does not mean that she is responsible for what happened. Again, people react differently under stressful circumstances due to past trauma, socialization, safety concerns, etc. There is no right or wrong way.
I'm not fighting PMFB-RN's battles, but you and I just don't see the situation the same.
Nobody said the OP was responsible for what happened to her.
As someone who would have stopped the inappropriate activity in it's tracks on day one, I'm puzzled how anybody would allow it to progress to the physical.
I'm not blaming anybody. I'm not saying anybody's wrong.
It's just so totally out of my nature to let anybody put their hands on me and not go ballistic, I can't get my mind around the fact that the OP didn't.
That's not a judgment. That's not blaming. It's just a matter of two different people, with two different histories, making two different choices.
I question her response just because it's so different from what I would have done.
I respect this.
I just think that people need to realize that not everyone is able to fight someone off right away. Too many people say "well I would have done xyz...why didn't YOU do that? That is so not helpful. People are different and have different reactions to being harassed/assaulted. I have a history of trauma and I had to learn to be more aggressive/assertive when dealing with unwanted advances. For some people, the thought never even enters their mind because of their experiences. I am NOT saying this is the OP, I'm just offering another perspective.
You are in Canada, get your union rep involved right away. They are your best protection. Don't worry about losing your job, labour laws will protect you, but document everything and try not to go to a meeting with management without your Union rep. Remember the doctor is an employee of the hospital/health authority and has no say in your employment no matter how long he has been around. His behaviour is deplorable and he needs to be called on it.
Playing the blame the victim game does nothing for people who are uncomfortable with assertiveness (of which there are many) because of personality, previous experiences, feeling cornered and/or intimidated.
Again, people react differently under stressful circumstances due to past trauma, socialization, safety concerns, etc. There is no right or wrong way.
(quote from brido)
(and thank you for your kind words!)
The two of you are in my opinion absolutely correct.
It always surprises me when people assume that everybody else will and/or should react and handle situations the exact same way as they would (or think they would in the cases where the person hasn't actually experienced a similar situation and is basically just speculating about how they'd act/react if it happened to them).
We all know about the fight or flight response. In my experience (previous law enforcement) there are really three possible reactions to threats. Fight, flight or freeze. The reason a person "chooses" one particular response in a specific situation, is multifactorial. Some depend on a specific individual's personality and others may be tied to the circumstances/situation itself. I couldn't possibly list the all but some are; social/cultural conditioning, previous life experiences (especially those involving emotional or physical abuse and trauma), self-esteem and confidence, assessment of the threat, assessment of the consequences of a particular action and physical ability/strength.
To complicate matters further, neither of the "choices" (fight, flight or freeze), is the correct one in every single situation. While reacting/defending yourself with physical force might be completely appropriate in some situations, it isn't always the best option. Sometimes it's actually a dangerous or at the very least, a less than wise option.
Anyway, human beings are complex. The reasons why they react/act a certain way are complex too.
If you question why a person handled an assault a certain way and imply that they should have handled it differently or say that they've allowed a behavior to go on for too long, you are shifting some of the responsibility on to them. That's not acceptable in my opinion.
If you personally are both willing and capable of defending yourself against any possible type of threat/attack, then good for you (I mean that sincerely), but don't demand or even expect every other person to be able to do the same. If they aren't,
it doesn't in any way make them more responsible for the assault that happened to them. It doesn't make them weak. It just makes them, not you.
Another comment that's bothered me is the implication that not being firm with the sleezy doc is the reason it's still going on. That isn't necessarily true at all. While I think it's important as a general rule to be very clear and say: "no, I'm not interested in going out with you", my primary motivation is legal (if a victim chooses to pursue a criminal charge against the perpetrator). In securing a conviction it's good to give a suspect as little future "wiggle room" as possible. When there are witnesses to this statement, it's more difficult for the predator/defense team to sell the idea that they thought the victim was interested.
Saying no is often not enough to discourage and change a predator's behavior. In fact many do enjoy the resistance since it's often not primarily a question of interest/attraction but one of power or domination. So really, stop blaming the victim.
Someone suggested that physically defending you wife is illegal. That's not exactly true. While I'm not an expert on US law I'm reasonably convinced that self-defense to ward off an imminent or ongoing attack is legal. What's illegal is retaliatory beatings/assaults after the fact when there is no immediate danger present or preemptory beatings for something that may or may not take place in the more distant future. Simply put, as far as the law is concerned, self-defense is for the here and now. Everything else is pretty much vigilantism.
Another thing. This manly bluster about beating a wife's/girlfriend's/partner's attacker into a pulp (or semi-pulp). I've seen this many times in real life. When men have uttered threats like they'll beat the crap out of the person suspected of/or arrested for the crime I did two things. First, I'd inform them that even though I understand that they're upset, what they're suggesting is illegal and will come with consequences. The other thing I'd do is to ask them, for whose benefit would this be carried out? Do they genuinely believe that this will make their wife or partner feel better or heal more swiftly or is it to make themselves feel better? When I talk to the women, it's not usually something they wish that their husbands/partners do. And as I mentioned earlier, these things can easily backfire.
One last thing. Should one decide to take "justice" (although I'd ague that it's more like vengeance) into their own hands, I find that it's wisest not to broadcast it anywhere, including "anonymous" forums. If it were me I'd make darn sure to make it a secret known to one person and take it to my grave.
Normally I always quote the post/s I'm responding to but there were so many different things that caught my attention. It's probably about ten different quotes/posts so I decided to make it a more general post addressing various issues.
Specializes in Peds/outpatient FP,derm,allergy/private duty.
So much of this is perception, I guess. The OP last replied as if the most dominant feature of our advice was that she should personally kick the guy's ass in some way shape or form, whereas I saw those replies as mostly metaphorical about the anger one would normally feel and not serious advice. My feeling is that the most dominant feature of the replies contained the involvement of the appropriate authorities which was ignored by the OP who felt she was being called "a pansy" for not clocking the guy.
That last post had the emotional tone that I hope she actually takes toward this person, rather than the "should I just ignore it" when part of what she would be ignoring is a guy fiddling with her name badge and touching her breast.
Specializes in Nurse Leader specializing in Labor & Delivery.
My feeling is that the most dominant feature of the replies contained the involvement of the appropriate authorities which was ignored by the OP who felt she was being called "a pansy" for not clocking the guy.
Well, to be fair, she WAS called a pansy. I imagine that kind of stung. It would be hard for me to look past that, as well.
I personally would handle it differently but that doesn't matter a bit. It's the fact that there is Dr in a superior position bumping and grinding a hospital employee. *****?!!
Specializes in Peds/outpatient FP,derm,allergy/private duty.
Well, to be fair, she WAS called a pansy. I imagine that kind of stung. It would be hard for me to look past that, as well.
I missed that one! :-/ Your main point is absolutely right, though. We're all different and therefore can't diminish someone else's experience because we don't understand their reaction especially when a job might be at stake and we know nothing of her personal history or circumstances. Sometimes my thought process makes it's way to my keyboard fingers too quickly....
jadelpn, LPN, EMT-B
9 Articles; 4,800 Posts
(Bolding my own)
OP, I can not stress to you enough the importance of bringing someone who is there with YOUR best interests in mind as opposed to just someone from HR, who is employed by the facility, therefore, have the facilities best interests in mind.
I would hate to think of you in a meeting with people railroading you into keeping all this hush/hush, that they are not going to do anything about it, whatever the case may be, and you leaving the meeting with the situation no different, other than you now have to keep your mouth shut about it.
From what you described, most facilities would have put this person on administrative leave pending an investigation. Additionally, because you initially reported it and were told to suck it up--I question the legality of that.
No one seems to be thinking "I will sue the pants off of you" thought process. Nor are you "I will kick butt" and your points regarding having nothing on you are valid and great points. But you do want to be sure that you protect yourself, and that the facility has an obligation to keep you safe.
Interestingly, as a psych nurse, your filter for safety is not a typical nurses. You deal with people every day who are not in their right mind, therefore, you pick and choose your communications carefully, and therapeutically. So what would seem logical to most nurses, is sometimes a little fuzzy to psych nurses, as practice has conditioned one to respond in a way that is in the other person's best interest. So please bring an impartial third party to this meeting. Your union rep is a good thought.
It giantly sucks that the only thing that you want to have happen is to be left alone, and the powers that be seem to have a difficult time making that happen for you.
Never the less, wishing you nothing but the best.