Althouse: Sure, I'll keep it private!

August 16, 2005

Sure, I'll keep it private!

I'll publish it in the New York Times, but other than that I'll keep it private.

23 comments:

Steven Taylor said...: Well, as the whole nannyblogger incident taught us, you an write about in the NYT so long as you don't blog it, for goodnesssake.; 8/16/05, 8:37 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: Totally missing your point, I thought that the article was quite cute. I can think of some other effects of a couple of cans of Mtn. Dew besides what he asked about. The caffine in them would be scary.; 8/16/05, 9:10 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Well, Bruce, imagine if the doctor had fully disclosed to the boy: I won't tell anyone you specifically said something, but I will use your statements to write articles that are widely punished, and I'll be especially likely to quote you if your question is embarrassing, so go ahead. Would the boy have spoken?; 8/16/05, 9:17 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: He asked whether his sperm count would go down if he drank a lot of Mtn. Dew - kinda like cheap birth control.

But this reminds me of a slightly OT story from college. Two senior pre-meds shacked up (I think Ann's class in college). She gets pregnant, has an abortion. He assures her that she can't get pregnant immediately after another pregnancy. She gets pregnant again immediately. Another abortion. She starts med school about 6 months later, and is now on the other side of this, answering questions like this from kids like him every day.; 8/16/05, 9:18 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: Ann,

No, of course not. But we really don't know how long ago this was. Yes, it is written almost as if it happened yesterday. But that is as likely a literary device. And if it happened, say 20 years ago, and he now has kids this age, he would probably think it quite humorous.; 8/16/05, 9:20 AM
Ann Althouse said...: And of course kids say "cute" things all the time, but maybe we ought to hesitate before exploiting their innocent cuteness.; 8/16/05, 9:21 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: Or, maybe, it is that I would, if it had been I twenty years ago asking this.

OTH, the Mountain Dew may indicate that it is more current. I don't know how popular it was back then with this age group.; 8/16/05, 9:22 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: One last thought. How likely is it that a 13 year old is reading this part of the NYT? Probably only if his parents have put a gun to his head (figuratively, not literally).

My daughter just left being 13, and getting her to read anything in the paper besides the comics is nearly impossible. I end up bribing her to read a page or so (of her choice) of the WSJ or The Economist - and she loves to read. Just not serious adult type stuff.; 8/16/05, 9:27 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: Ann,

I agree too with your statement about exploitation. Sorry if I am playing too much the devil's advocate - a result of what you do for a living (i.e. law school).; 8/16/05, 9:29 AM
ploopusgirl said...: Or maybe you should just lighten up, Ann. No one's being exploited here. The boy probably doesn't read the New York Times' Health section at thirteen. Even if he does, his name is never mentioned, and I'm not quite sure that all thirteen year olds are so paranoid as to think that everyone he knows will think that the random thirteen year old boy in the article is him. You're reading WAY too much into this.; 8/16/05, 9:35 AM
Kat Coble said...: . No one's being exploited here. The boy probably doesn't read the New York Times' Health section at thirteen.

The victim of exploitation doesn't have to be aware of it for exploitation to exist. I sleep nude. (I'm going somewhere with this...)

In college my roomate sold tickets to guys on campus to view my soundly-sleeping naked body. Our dorm was in the basement, and our window was ground level. I wasn't aware of this nightly bit of fun for several weeks. Would you say that I was still exploited? Yep.

Same with this boy. He placed his trust in this physician. Regardless of hiis daily reading habits, she still violated that trust.; 8/16/05, 9:48 AM
ploopusgirl said...: No, Mycro, he hasn't been. The physician never mentions his name. At the mention of his name, she would be entirely in the wrong and clearly exploiting him. Well, at that point it would be illegal as well, and her liscence would be in severe jeopardy. However, his name is not mentioned. Physicians regularly publish anonymous accounts of experiences with their patients in newspaper health sections and in medical journals. This is not as big a deal as Ann, and you apparently, would want to make it out to be.; 8/16/05, 9:56 AM
goesh said...: Any herbalist worth his salt would have told the boy the same thing the good doctor did - I see nary a comment on patient/doctor repoire, which I think is often lacking these days. AND, any herbalist worth his salt can see that Poopusgirl has been ingesting too much Stinging Nettle.
All I can say is maybe some Health teacher can use this article to dispel some myths young people have about their bodies.; 8/16/05, 9:58 AM
ploopusgirl said...: Goesh: Why don't you grow the hell up already? Maybe your belief that you can substitute an herbalist for a real physician has made you the moron you are today, eh?; 8/16/05, 10:00 AM
goesh said...: Well! I have never advocated replacing a physician with an herbalist. I have stated that certain herbs are indeed beneficial and have more efficacy than standard medications. If you want to play hard ball, so be it. I won't then suggest a remedy for the chronic constipation you appear to be plagued with.; 8/16/05, 11:09 AM
Joan said...: I think Ann needs to read more medblogs.

The likelihood is that this article is based on several actual conversations, and is an amalgam of experiences. The author has probably had those same questions asked, and seen that same flustered embarrassment, from dozens if not hundreds of patients.

There is no violation here. I do think that it would have been better to include a disclaimer at the end of the article, as many medblogs do, that the anecdotes related therein do not refer to any particular patient, but do truthfully represent the type of exchanges the doctor has with these young people.

Was that a Freudian slip, or did you really mean to say "widely punished"!?; 8/16/05, 11:33 AM
knox said...: "Regularly, I embarrass my own children. I tell stories that they view as mildly (or not so mildly) inappropriate, or I use words they feel should not be used in polite company."

nice!; 8/16/05, 12:44 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Thanks, Walter. I think it's interesting how the comments have fixed on the concept of a "violation."

Do I need to read more medblogs? The assumption there is that the doctors' ideas about ethics are what matters. But why? Maybe I have a stronger idea of what duties we owe to minors. There are higher concepts of morality that we might want to consider.

I wouldn't write an essay or a blog post quoting something a student said that I thought my readers might enjoy laughing at. I wouldn't think withholding the name would be enough — or making a composite quote.; 8/16/05, 1:22 PM
Joan said...: I think if you read more medblogs, you'd see that this type of anecdote is quite common in writing that doctors do for public consumption. As I said before, typically a disclaimer will be included. But in a discussion such as this one, wherein no unique identifiers are present which could identify an individual patient, I don't think the lack of disclaimer makes this an ethical violation. Health care privacy is very big deal since HIPAA, and I doubt that either the author of the piece or the editors of the NY Times failed to consider whether or not the contents of the article were sufficiently generic enough so as to avoid identifying a particular patient.

Researchers also routinely reveal the results of anonymous surveys, including comments that people make on the issues being examined. The people making these comments are assured of their privacy; when the comments are made public, they are done so without attribution. Are researchers who report data like that also committing an ethical violation?; 8/16/05, 1:50 PM
Joan said...: According to Jonathon, every medblogger who writes a story based in anyway on patient interaction is violating that patients' trust.

I disagree -- but I'm going to blog on this issue and submit it to the next Grand Rounds and see what the medbloggers think. I think this topic could use some input from those in the medical profession who routinely deal with this kind of ethical situation.; 8/16/05, 9:57 PM
ploopusgirl said...: Joan: I think I love you. I love when someone who actually knows what they're talking about shuts these fools up. ;); 8/16/05, 10:05 PM
Joan said...: Jonathon wrote: I do not oppose disclosure of patient information as long as the patient doesn't mind.

Let's call the patient and ask him if he thinks the doctor violated his trust. Should be easy to do. At least Jonathon seems to think so.; 8/17/05, 10:10 AM
Joan said...: My post, the anonymous patient has been submitted to Grand Rounds for next week. Stay tuned!; 8/18/05, 3:00 AM