Posted on 02/14/2005 2:56:44 PM PST by Soliton
Would it be out of place for an internist on an OB/GYN rotation to do an Intrutrine Instillation?
Intruterine
Intrauterine
Whether they've committed abortions or not is somewhat of a mute point.
The real issue now is that Howie, in his new role, supports the killing of unborn children up to birth.
It does matter if they performed the abortions or not - you see there is a special place in hell for those who hold the knife.
Granted if the Dean's were offered the "experience" I doubt they would have declined.
As far as training at PP, I've never seen Internal Med residence rotating through there because now you can get loads of experience in the ERs,but it's possible. I have no idea what it was like back then.
There are so many levels to who CAN do what and what they're likely to do...there are Licenses, privileges and scope of practice.They're all different.
As a physician a psychiatrist is LICENSED to do an appendectomy - or for that matter brain surgery. However no hospital is going to give them PRIVILEGES to do anything other than practice within the scope of psychiatry. If they did an appendectomy or brain surgery it would be malpractice. (These kind of discussions relate to whether or not OB/GYN's should be giving botox - some are.)
Most internists (all I know) would be unlikely to feel confident doing an intrauterine instillation. I don't know of any internal medicine program that would teach intrauterine instillations. They'd refer it to the OB/GYN. It sounds to me like its basically an amniocentesis, but instead of withdrawing amniotic fluid, saline is instilled.
Could the Deans have received extra training from an OB/GYN and then done intrauterine instillations - Sure, their licenses would allow them to do this.
But having been through internal medicine internship, I believe it's more likely that they felt they didn't get enough experience doing even basic GYN procedures like pap smears and pelvic exams (that they would be asked to perform in a private practice clinic) and they were looking to get more experience at the very basics.
I could be wrong - but without any paperwork showing "privileges" for them do do intrauterine instillations, I can accept their explanation without thinking it's necessarily fishy. Others clearly think differently.
If Dr. SDean has no problem with abortion, what would be wrong with him releasing the records. It might help him.
I really am not trying to defend Dean. Generally speaking I don't like him or what he stands for. I just don't want our side to end up looking as crazy as the left did over the Texas Air National Guard paperwork.
More information is better than less and I don't think there would be anything wrong with opening up his records on what kinds of privileges he's held where. (Though clearly opening up patient records gets into privacy issues).
I sort of suspect though that he sees it as a no win situation. After a number of years it wouldn't surpise me if a page here or there is missing (as they were with GWB's national guard records). If the bulk of records exonerate him (at least in terms of actually performing abortions rather than 'just' being pro-choice - which we already know he is) there will be some on the right who will be as unsatisfied with the validity of those records as some on the left were with GWB's TANG records.
Thanks for the unbiased response. We should never be guilty of forcing our data to match our hypothosis.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.