So we recently admitted a male patient who identifies himself as female. We don't get many patients like her. A nurse in particular let's his political views get in the way of work and has been calling this patient "it".
Now, let's fast forward to the dilemma. During medication pass, he addressed the patient as "it" out loud and other staff and patients started laughing; next thing you know, we had a behavioral emergency on our hands.
I filled out an incident report because several other nurses and I have spoken to this nurse prior to the event happening. One nurse even brought it up the chain of command. Not only is it unprofessional but it's endangering the safety of others - clearly, it's one of her triggers. Has anyone ever dealt with this type of conduct?
It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was considered a mental disorder.
You should understand that many people still consider it one. Many do not accept the thoroughly political process by which it was removed from the DSM.
It's obviously not a choice (it might be for a very select few), but even with all the strenuous effort to do so, no one's been able to prove it's genetic either. I think it's most likely that something goes very wrong during a child's development and makes normal biological sexual orientation impossible. I think TG is most likely the same kind of thing. I don't know if it's environmental, biochemical, or a combination of the two. Since no biochemical basis has ever been demonstrated, I lean more toward it being primarily environmental. And before anyone asks, no, not that ridiculous theory about how coddling or "overmothering" boys turns them gay. But I admit I don't really know. The point is, neither does anyone else, for certain. I think the number of homosexual people who have a childhood history of sexual abuse is extremely relevant, though. It's higher than the general public. I'll find a source for that because I know some of you will go crazy.
None of these thoughts of mine impact my ability to live politely down the street from my gay neighbors who are raising a daughter (belongs biologically to one of them) together, nor to take respectful, compassionate care of the gay patients I've had. Because these thoughts aren't relevant to patient care, and there is absolutely no reason to bring them up in that venue.
As someone said up thread, it's called being an adult.
So people's right to hold their opinion is only valid when you agree with it?
And the other side isn't trying to impose anything on their opponents at all, right?
The existence of, and scientific understanding of gender dysphoria is not really an opinion. The suggestion that it may not exist is and opinion, and a poorly substantiated one. The rational basis for not believing in the existence of gender dysphoria (as a condition that people are born with to a significant degree) often seems to be that it's just not something people want to admit exists, often based on conservative christian beliefs.
The idea that development of different aspects of gender and sex can be inconsistent is extremely well proven. There are people who we can clearly see have developed the external genitalia of one sex, yet the internal reproductive organs of the opposite sex. The neurological foundation that provides our innate feelings about which gender we identify with is just another component of this development and isn't any more immune to developing contrary to the external genitalia than the internal reproductive organs are.
You should understand that many people still consider it one. Many do not accept the thoroughly political process by which it was removed from the DSM.
It's obviously not a choice (it might be for a very select few), but even with all the strenuous effort to do so, no one's been able to prove it's genetic either. I think it's most likely that something goes very wrong during a child's development and makes normal biological sexual orientation impossible. I think TG is most likely the same kind of thing. I don't know if it's environmental, biochemical, or a combination of the two. Since no biochemical basis has ever been demonstrated, I lean more toward it being primarily environmental. And before anyone asks, no, not that ridiculous theory about how coddling or "overmothering" boys turns them gay. But I admit I don't really know. The point is, neither does anyone else, for certain. I think the number of homosexual people who have a childhood history of sexual abuse is extremely relevant, though. It's higher than the general public. I'll find a source for that because I know some of you will go crazy.
None of these thoughts of mine impact my ability to live politely down the street from my gay neighbors who are raising a daughter (belongs biologically to one of them) together, nor to take respectful, compassionate care of the gay patients I've had. Because these thoughts aren't relevant to patient care, and there is absolutely no reason to bring them up in that venue.
As someone said up thread, it's called being an adult.
What I bolded is an opinion of yours that I hope you'll remember is only a personal opinion, rather than a claim to truth. It's important to make that distinction within yourself, but it is VERY important to make that distinction when you speak your opinion to others. You have NO evidence to back that up, yet you don't qualify your opinion AS an opinion. In the great scheme of things, you've done no one any direct damage. It's the intent behind speaking such things that is the problem.
When one's opinion about homosexuality or TGism is based upon a few phrases in an ancient religious text, and remains so in spite of the medical system having dropped homosexuality as a disorder, it loses credibility even further. You have every right to actually believe your opinion to be true. And if you speak it as if it were some kind of truth, you have every right to get the backlash from the real experts and advocates. You speaking your opinion as if it were true is why they need advocates, which is really too bad.
Personally, I think people hold onto the opinions that get them through the night. Rationality has little to do with it.
I don't care if a coworker thinks I'm an alien walk-in from the Andromeda Galaxy coming to steal Earth's water, as long as that opinion isn't used to justify abusive behavior towards me or my patients.
My son was a homophobe for several years during his teens ... peer pressure is a ferocious thing. I didn't waste my time trying to talk him out of it. I simply made it clear that he was not allowed to spew that filth under my roof or to disrespect the people in my life. IOW, I addressed his behavior and left his thinking alone. If that created some sort of cognitive dissonance for him, that was his problem to figure out. By the time he got out of high school and into the Marines, he was pretty much over the worst of it.
I'm pretty much over endlessly debunking the same "stinkin' thinkin' " when the real issue is behavior in the workplace and mistreatment of a patient.
And, let's be fair. Red K was pretty clear that she does not consider her personal opinion reason for disrespect or abuse of TG patients.
You should understand that many people still consider it one. Many do not accept the thoroughly political process by which it was removed from the DSM.
It's obviously not a choice (it might be for a very select few), but even with all the strenuous effort to do so, no one's been able to prove it's genetic either. I think it's most likely that something goes very wrong during a child's development and makes normal biological sexual orientation impossible. I think TG is most likely the same kind of thing. I don't know if it's environmental, biochemical, or a combination of the two. Since no biochemical basis has ever been demonstrated, I lean more toward it being primarily environmental. And before anyone asks, no, not that ridiculous theory about how coddling or "overmothering" boys turns them gay. But I admit I don't really know. The point is, neither does anyone else, for certain. I think the number of homosexual people who have a childhood history of sexual abuse is extremely relevant, though. It's higher than the general public. I'll find a source for that because I know some of you will go crazy.
None of these thoughts of mine impact my ability to live politely down the street from my gay neighbors who are raising a daughter (belongs biologically to one of them) together, nor to take respectful, compassionate care of the gay patients I've had. Because these thoughts aren't relevant to patient care, and there is absolutely no reason to bring them up in that venue.
As someone said up thread, it's called being an adult.
I wouldn't doubt that homosexuals have a higher incidence of being sexually abused as children than hererosexuals. I doubt it's a huge difference, though. And for this theory to make sense, how is it explained that most homosexuals were NOT sexually abused as children? The real explanation for whatever statistical discrepancy does exist is that homosexual children are more vulnerable to sexual abuse than heterosexual children. They are abused because they're homosexual..... they don't become homosexual because they're abused. That's a key distinction.
That's like the argument that homosexuals having higher incidences of psychiatric issues equals proof that homosexuality in and of itself a disorder. When society tells gay people they're "wrong" and evil from childhood, and living a lie or living a double life are the only options, it sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, now doesn't it?
You're entitled to your opinion. But it amuses me that so many heterosexual people think they know what being gay is like better than actual gay people. It is not environmental. People are born gay, or they're not.
And while I'm confident you truly are compassionate toward your gay or TG patients, that doesn't change the fact that the "homosexuality is environmental" claim is offensive, as is the claim that it's a disorder. It's used as a tool to validate the denial of civil liberties to an entire segment of the population. Denying civil liberties to law abiding, tax paying citizens who were born different is clearly wrong. Denying those liberties to people who are mentally disturbed deviants is so much more attractive.
Im not saying you advocate denying anyone their civil rights. But your opinions certainly make it easier for those who do.
That's the one thing that bothers me about the GLBTG political agenda. I notice a tendency towards intolerance of others points of view. Red Kryptonite has proven herself on this forum as a reasonable, intelligent poster, not a radical homophobe. She doesn't totally buy into the currently socially acceptable opinion that sexual identity is imprinted in the womb.
Her opinions are seen as a threat to all that is right and good, and contributing to acts of violence and hate.
Red Kryptonite
2,212 Posts
You should understand that many people still consider it one. Many do not accept the thoroughly political process by which it was removed from the DSM.
It's obviously not a choice (it might be for a very select few), but even with all the strenuous effort to do so, no one's been able to prove it's genetic either. I think it's most likely that something goes very wrong during a child's development and makes normal biological sexual orientation impossible. I think TG is most likely the same kind of thing. I don't know if it's environmental, biochemical, or a combination of the two. Since no biochemical basis has ever been demonstrated, I lean more toward it being primarily environmental. And before anyone asks, no, not that ridiculous theory about how coddling or "overmothering" boys turns them gay. But I admit I don't really know. The point is, neither does anyone else, for certain. I think the number of homosexual people who have a childhood history of sexual abuse is extremely relevant, though. It's higher than the general public. I'll find a source for that because I know some of you will go crazy.
None of these thoughts of mine impact my ability to live politely down the street from my gay neighbors who are raising a daughter (belongs biologically to one of them) together, nor to take respectful, compassionate care of the gay patients I've had. Because these thoughts aren't relevant to patient care, and there is absolutely no reason to bring them up in that venue.
As someone said up thread, it's called being an adult.