Doctor Tells Patient She Is Fat

Off Topic
101

[quote]ValoMerde wrote:
I hope the dumbasses who were thwacking the fat lady for making a complaint feel real stupid, but I doubt you will. You all were ready to hang the lady and you only had one side of the story.

Her complaint had nothing to do with being fat, but about the obvious racial content in the Docs’ comments. “You’re so fat that only black me will date you”? The Dr. you admire and adore so much put on a nice spin and you lemmings jumped of the cliff. No wonder people like Hitler were able to gather so many followers. He had morons like you who believed everything they heard or read.

Good job, idiots. Know your facts before you talk and maybe people won’t get hurt.

Have a nice day.[/quote]

How do you know the second article is any more accurate than the first one?

Why did it take a week for the 2nd version to come out? Could it be that the fat lady suddenly “remembered” that the doctor had also made racial remarks?

I mean, since her initial complaint was going nowhere fast, maybe she remembered details to give it a little more bite.

I find it very odd that a racial slur complaint would be initially reported as “the doc said I’m fat, boo-hoo.”

Unless someone taped the actual conversation, this whole thing will degenerate to a matter of one person’s word against another’s.

102

I can’t believe this thread got a hitler reference. What a tool!

So, is the guy being investigated for telling this lady she was fat or because he made a racial reference?

103

[quote]vroom wrote:
I can’t believe this thread got a hitler reference. What a tool!

So, is the guy being investigated for telling this lady she was fat or because he made a racial reference?

[/quote]

Sorry I keep replying so often. The article I posted says it is about the racist remark and previous complaints against the doctor. I will quote some of them.

 "Bennett made national news last week when the complaint from the obese woman became public without any mention of the racial comment. But Senior Assistant Attorney General Richard Head, who leads the state Consumer Protection and Antitrust Bureau, said Tuesday the woman complained about the racial remark, not about being lectured.
   In a telephone interview Tuesday from Rochester, Bennett denied any wrongdoing and defended his message to her, saying he has read polls that say black men prefer overweight women."

“The board said it also is taking a second look at a 2001 allegation ? deemed unfounded at the time ? that Bennett told a woman recovering from brain surgery to buy a pistol and shoot herself to end her suffering.”

This is just the article I read. Not saying which is more reputable, but who knows. Oh and for pookie saying she might just be saying this now, here is a quote from an interview with good ol’ Doc. ?That patient is currently in a nursing home completely demented, tied to a chair drooling on herself and doesn?t recognize anybody,? said Bennett, 67. ?She was in pretty nearly that condition at the time she filed that complaint.? (sounds to me like maybe she isn’t making new stories at least).

104

In all fairness, as a group, black men do seem to prefer heavier women than white men do. And still, honestly, who gives a fuck what he said? If I went to a black doctor who said something about white people that I found offensive, I would… gasp… get a new doctor.

105

If the truth hurts too much change your reality. I have no compassion for this situation…

106

[quote]vroom wrote:
I can’t believe this thread got a hitler reference. What a tool!

So, is the guy being investigated for telling this lady she was fat or because he made a racial reference?

[/quote]

You want other names? Stalin, Jim Jones, how are those? It’s the idea you goat. I didn’t call or compare anyone to Hitler.

107

[quote]pookie wrote:
ValoMerde wrote:
I hope the dumbasses who were thwacking the fat lady for making a complaint feel real stupid, but I doubt you will. You all were ready to hang the lady and you only had one side of the story.

Her complaint had nothing to do with being fat, but about the obvious racial content in the Docs’ comments. “You’re so fat that only black me will date you”? The Dr. you admire and adore so much put on a nice spin and you lemmings jumped of the cliff. No wonder people like Hitler were able to gather so many followers. He had morons like you who believed everything they heard or read.

Good job, idiots. Know your facts before you talk and maybe people won’t get hurt.

Have a nice day.

How do you know the second article is any more accurate than the first one?

Why did it take a week for the 2nd version to come out? Could it be that the fat lady suddenly “remembered” that the doctor had also made racial remarks?

I mean, since her initial complaint was going nowhere fast, maybe she remembered details to give it a little more bite.

I find it very odd that a racial slur complaint would be initially reported as “the doc said I’m fat, boo-hoo.”

Unless someone taped the actual conversation, this whole thing will degenerate to a matter of one person’s word against another’s.
[/quote]

I agree with you 100%. We don’t know the actual truth because they haven’t released the actual written complaint. Bottom line is, everyone assumed that the Doctor was the victim by hearing only his story. Was it because the people who responded to this thread believe that fat people lie or because an educated doctor spoke convincingly?

108

[quote]MaloVerde wrote:
I hope the dumbasses who were thwacking the fat lady for making a complaint feel real stupid, but I doubt you will. You all were ready to hang the lady and you only had one side of the story. [/quote]

No, I had already heard both sides. AT 59, he has seen hundreds if not thousands of his patients die from exactly her condition. After 7 visits, and patient getting fatter each time, and developing diabetes, chest pains, etc, he became frustrated, and clearly made some childish inappropriate comments, that he intended to help save the ladies life.

Its a good thing you were not the doctor being frustrated. He made those comments trying to shock someone into saving their own life. You made much worse comments, trying to???

[quote]Her complaint had nothing to do with being fat, but about the obvious racial content in the Docs’ comments. “You’re so fat that only black men will date you”? The Dr. you admire and adore so much put on a nice spin and you lemmings jumped of the cliff. No wonder people like Hitler were able to gather so many followers. He had morons like you who believed everything they heard or read.

Good job, idiots. Know your facts before you talk and maybe people won’t get hurt.

Have a nice day.[/quote]

The bottom line is some people get emotional when they get frustrated, and resort to acting like a 5 year old. Doctors included, though I would bet more rarely. Doctors obviously should be held to a higher standard in dealing with patients, and they are, and there is a mechanism in place to ensure it - the state board of medicine. The question is once the complaint got to the board, why did they need to criminalize a he said/she said spat and send to the AG office, instead of doing their job.

109

When all else fails, there is always the race card. The media whores eat it up every time.

110

[quote]MaloVerde wrote:
Was it because the people who responded to this thread believe that fat people lie or because an educated doctor spoke convincingly? [/quote]

Or… it could be because many of us are sick and tired of people wanting to get the legal system involved every time they get their panties in a twist. The doctor didn’t deny her service.

111

Some good points. I am glad the thread took a direction of explanation instead of name calling.

112

[quote]pookie wrote:
ValoMerde wrote:
[/quote]

Lol, nice!

113

[quote]nephorm wrote:

Or… it could be because many of us are sick and tired of people wanting to get the legal system involved every time they get their panties in a twist. [/quote]

Exactly.

114

[quote]jmott1 wrote:
Well, at least one of his patients is taking up for him.

She’s taking up a petition to get the A.G. shitcanned. Any folks from New Hampshire here care to sign that?[/quote]

I’d like to sign the petition (as I’m sure that most of the T-Nation would). Tell her to send the petition this way…

115

It appears that the doctor will not be disciplined by the NH Board of Medicine:

No gag for doctor, judge says

By GARRY RAYNO
Union Leader Staff
18 hours, 46 minutes ago

Concord - A Merrimack County Superior Court judge ordered the Board of Medicine to stop disciplinary proceedings against Dr. Terry Bennett, the Rochester doctor who came under fire for comments that offended three patients.

?The court ruled resoundingly in my favor. Not a bad birthday present,? said Bennett, who celebrated his 68th birthday yesterday.

Judge Edward Fitzgerald?s June 30 ruling said the Rochester doctor?s constitutional rights to free speech and due process were violated by the board. The judge said the board?s regulations are not drawn narrowly enough to protect free speech, so the board is not entitled to regulate speech at all.

The complaints included charges that Bennett ?stunned, shocked, embarrassed (and) humiliated? a woman by telling her she was so obese she might only be attractive to black men. In 2001, a female patient said he suggested she shoot herself to end her suffering. The third complaint came from a woman who said she was offended by Bennett?s comments on how her son might have contracted hepatitis.

?While the Court does not in any way condone the type of comments made by the petitioner, it is nonetheless important, as a general matter, to ensure that physicians and patients are free to discuss matters relating to health without fear of government reprisal, even if such discussions may sometimes be harsh, rude or offensive to the listener,? Fitzgerald wrote.

Bennett?s attorney, Benjamin King of the Concord law firm of Douglas, Leonard & Garvey, said yesterday ?each of the pending complaints concern the content of speech. The absence of narrowly tailored regulations, renders the prosecution of any of the complaints constitutionally improper. We?re very pleased to have vindicated Dr. Bennett?s constitutional rights.?

The board had scheduled a disciplinary hearing several times this spring, but postponed action until the court ruled on Bennett?s request for an injunction.

Penny Taylor, administrator for the Board of Medicine, said they had just received the court order yesterday.

?We?d have to talk to the board attorney to see what the next step is,? she said.

Assistant Attorney General Elyse Alkalay, who represented the board, told The Associated Press she is reviewing the ruling and expects it will be several days before a decision is made whether to appeal.

?The board has a 10-day window here and we?ll see if they appeal this and waste your and my tax dollars. They have never understood the limits of their power,? Bennett said.

At some point, Bennett said he plans to sue everyone involved for ?malicious prosecution.?

?It?s been a devastating and infuriating two years; it cost me $50,000 and I had to explain to my crying 10-year-old daughter why everybody hates her father,? he said. ?I don?t forget stuff like that.?

In his ruling, Fitzgerald writes “the Court finds that the regulations under which the petitioner is charged are impermissibly vague because they do not provide a reasonable opportunity to understand what conduct is prohibited. The statute, rule and principle relied upon by the Board give only general descriptions of what is expected of physicians.”

The board?s attorney argued persons in licensed professions do so subject to the regulations of the licensing boards and do not have the same free speech rights as those outside licensed professions, but the court rejected the argument.

?The Court does not agree that the decision by a person to subject him or herself to the regulations of licensed professions necessarily limits his or her right to speak freely and, in fact, the Board points to no law in New Hampshire that so holds,? the judge wrote.

The board appealed an earlier Fitzgerald ruling ordering the board to make its decisions in public in Bennett?s case. Fitzgerald reaffirmed his order in February after the board?s attorney asked him to reconsider.

King said the new ruling makes that appeal to the Supreme Court moot because now the board is not authorized to deliberate on any of the complaints against Bennett.

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=No+gag+for+doctor%2C+judge+says&articleId=4a09d791-93c7-4460-853b-e53163c11258

116

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Doctor: “You are fat.”

Patient: “I am going to get a second opinion.”

Doctor: “You are ugly too.”[/quote]

Funny

117

[quote]Gianacakos wrote:

That article altered my perspective slightly. He openly admits to telling her that maybe only black men would find her attractive if her husband died. That is a little overboard. Doctors should still be honest, but not cruel.[/quote]

I live in NH. This was in the local news months ago. I heard he said, “If you get any bigger not even a black man will want you.” The media makes it sound like he is in trouble for telling her she is obese but it is how he said it.

I do believe that a doctor has the responsibility to tell a patient they are obese, especially a pediatrician, but what he said was wrong.

118

[quote]cvb wrote:
I do believe that a doctor has the responsibility to tell a patient they are obese, especially a pediatrician, but what he said was wrong.[/quote]

So he should be professionally disciplined? Give me a break. This is one of those “sort it out in the marketplace” kinds of deals.

119

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:

Yeah, but McDonald’s served it that way because people wanted it that way – they had reams of market data on their coffee, and they knew they sold more when it was very hot. [/quote]

Wrong. Customers did not “want it that way”, the coffee sold better because they kept a pot on the warmer on top of the coffee maker near boiling hot, which wafted up a lot of steam, and thus permeated the restaurant with coffee aroma, thus inducing more coffee sales.

However, at those high temperatures, a pot of coffee becomes black sludge (and ruins the pot) when it reaches something like one hour old, so it has to be discarded and a new pot made. After awhile, the cost of throwing out all of these pots of coffee came to the attention of McDonlad’s bean-counters. Their solution; sell it just before it goes bad at its near-boiling temperatures, even though this clearly violated federal law regarding food serving temperatures. Which leads us to your next bit of incorrect, assumptive data:

You “don’t think”, huh? Well, OSHA certainly did (and does). McDonalds had been issued several warnings and fines for keeping/serving their coffee too hot prior to this incident. McDonalds kept up their non-compliance even in the face of customer complaints because the profits outweighed the fines. Fiscally sound business practice, or assholes who disregarded public safety and deserved to get sued? You decide.

[quote]I still think this one was in defiance of common sense – paying people money for not being swift enough to keep hot coffee away from their genital areas does not strike me as good policy.
[/quote]

Yeah, the next time you are handed somthing with a poorly fastened lid in your car and it slops out, let us know where the liquid goes.

120

[quote]nephorm wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
I know the term “industry standard” is very popular with lawyers, but when you think about it I don’t think there were any established guidelines for how hot coffee should be.

I agree with you, except McDonalds had quite a few recorded complaints about the high temperature. If you can establish that McDonalds knew that their coffee was dangerously hot, and that they chose to keep it that way despite numerous complaints, then you’re looking at culpability.

I still think this one was in defiance of common sense – paying people money for not being swift enough to keep hot coffee away from their genital areas does not strike me as good policy.

Well, you can blame McDonalds for caving, then. While I don’t agree with suing them for a large sum (medical bills, yes), I do think that there is some reasonable standard of safety that we expect from our food and drink. Everyone should expect minor burns from hot food, but probably not third degree burns. That’s a bit unreasonable.

And also, do we really want to make the argument that companies should sell an unsafe product because the market demands it?[/quote]

and more importantly, does this woman need some soothing lotion applied to her genitals?

I would like to pipe in and say that Beef, its whats for dinner, and EAT BEEF are two very famous slogans in Kansas, and may have originated here.
Kinda of like the Just say no program, kansas is working dilligently to get fat people to eat better things.