3 ms·

Do you want or trust a surgeon who hates you to operate on you?

sgift 8y ago
Yes. That's part of what makes that surgeon a professional - that they ignore their bias and do their job. If they cannot provide that standard of conduct they are unfit to be a surgeon.
- Matticus_Rex 8y ago
  What's better, a world where we have X surgeons who will do a good job for everyone, or a world where we have those X surgeons plus Y surgeons who refuse to operate on certain people, but do a good job for everyone else? It's not a choice between case 2 and a magical fairy tale case where we get X+Y surgeons who will do a good job for everyone.
  - evanlivingston 8y ago
    separate but equal.
geofft 8y ago
Compared to not being treated at all? I might very well be willing to take my chances. Also, the market's capacity to support surgeons is limited; not everyone who wants to can be a surgeon. And you get better at what you do with experience/practice and with employment in a place where you learn from other qualified folks. Laws that make life hard for surgeons who hate some of their patients have the effect of opening up positions for potential surgeons who wouldn't hate some of their patients. There is a question of just how fair this is to the surgeon / whether it violates some fundamental rights (which is what SCOTUS was addressing here), but there is absolutely a benefit to society in legislating hateful surgeons out of their jobs.
- Matticus_Rex 8y ago
  > Compared to not being treated at all? Except that's not the relevant comparison.
  - dorchadas 8y ago
    Why isn't it? What if there's only one in-network surgeon that performs the surgery with your insurance? Or what if you live in a small- or medium-sized town and can't travel to another city where there might be more people able to perform the surgery? I can think of numerous cases where there might only be one surgeon who can perform it -- so you either take your chances or you go without.
djcapelis 8y ago
I mean if you have a choice in the matter and all other things are equal, clearly you don't. But it turns out not all surgeries are elective, many are emergent and even for the elective ones, surgical experience is not evenly distributed so making it so that some people have a smaller selection of surgeons to chose from is less likely to lead to good health outcomes for that section of the population.

Yes. That's part of what makes that surgeon a professional - that they ignore their bias and do their job. If they cannot provide that standard of conduct they are unfit to be a surgeon.

Matticus_Rex 8y ago
What's better, a world where we have X surgeons who will do a good job for everyone, or a world where we have those X surgeons plus Y surgeons who refuse to operate on certain people, but do a good job for everyone else? It's not a choice between case 2 and a magical fairy tale case where we get X+Y surgeons who will do a good job for everyone.
- evanlivingston 8y ago
  separate but equal.

geofft 8y ago

Compared to not being treated at all? I might very well be willing to take my chances. Also, the market's capacity to support surgeons is limited; not everyone who wants to can be a surgeon. And you get better at what you do with experience/practice and with employment in a place where you learn from other qualified folks. Laws that make life hard for surgeons who hate some of their patients have the effect of opening up positions for potential surgeons who wouldn't hate some of their patients. There is a question of just how fair this is to the surgeon / whether it violates some fundamental rights (which is what SCOTUS was addressing here), but there is absolutely a benefit to society in legislating hateful surgeons out of their jobs.

Matticus_Rex 8y ago
> Compared to not being treated at all? Except that's not the relevant comparison.
- dorchadas 8y ago
  Why isn't it? What if there's only one in-network surgeon that performs the surgery with your insurance? Or what if you live in a small- or medium-sized town and can't travel to another city where there might be more people able to perform the surgery? I can think of numerous cases where there might only be one surgeon who can perform it -- so you either take your chances or you go without.

djcapelis 8y ago

I mean if you have a choice in the matter and all other things are equal, clearly you don't. But it turns out not all surgeries are elective, many are emergent and even for the elective ones, surgical experience is not evenly distributed so making it so that some people have a smaller selection of surgeons to chose from is less likely to lead to good health outcomes for that section of the population.