Cont: Donald Trump has 'dangerous mental illness' say psychiatry experts at Yale... Pt 3

[xjx388]

It's easy. Take the case of Trump as an example. More than a few highly credentialed professionals have described in detail why they felt the need to override the arguments

An appeal to popularity?

you seem to think should be burned into one's soul.

If you don’t think ethics should be the core of a professionals practice. I don’t think we will agree on very much.

Ethics: The Goldwater Rule had to be overridden here given the threat they believe Trump poses.

Begging the question.

And if you are still arguing for that in-person exam, you are dismissing the professional judgement of thousands of professionals that can see it would add nothing in this case and Trump's pathologic NPD is blatantly obvious.

Another argument by popularity. And it’s worth pointing out that there is no evidence of “thousands of professionals” who think this way. At best, there are somewhere around 40 professionals who have publicly spoken about this.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

An appeal to popularity?

If you don’t think ethics should be the core of a professionals practice. I don’t think we will agree on very much.

Begging the question.



Another argument by popularity. And it’s worth pointing out that there is no evidence of “thousands of professionals” who think this way. At best, there are somewhere around 40 professionals who have publicly spoken about this.

You seem to be confusing a difference of opinion between professionals as an appeal to popularity.

Wow, that is some twisted logic: one side is valid and the other isn't?

 

[xjx388]

You seem to be confusing a difference of opinion between professionals as an appeal to popularity.

I’m not confused about anything.

There are thousands of doctors who promote full-blown woo as part of their practice. Their argument is that, in their professional judgement, these woo treatments are safe and effective. Does the fact that so many of them agree with each other make their judgement sound? No, it doesn’t.

The fact that a relative handful of MHPs disagree with the Goldwater Rule, similarly, tells us nothing about whether or not they are exercising good professional judgement.

Wow, that is some twisted logic: one side is valid and the other isn't?

Yes, there is one side of this that is clearly based on the established standards of practice and ethics. There is another side that is on the complete opposite side with nothing to support them but their own judgement and mutual agreement.

We fundamentally disagree about which side is valid. That doesn’t mean I’m being illogical.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yawn... Doctors who promote woo isn't an example helping your argument. You're back to asserting that without anally following guidelines no professionals would know what to do.

I know you want that to be true, that said position papers are absolute. That's not how it works and no amount of feet stamping is going to make it so.

Nowhere in medicine does any provider not consider professional judgement superior in multiple cases. It's even taught that way in med school. Evidence based medicine, yes, but sometimes it doesn't fit the situation.

 

[xjx388]

Yawn... Doctors who promote woo isn't an example helping your argument.

My argument is: Professional Judgement is not a good tool for deciding which ethical rules are valid and which are not.

Do you consider advocating and providing unproven, ineffective treatments to be ethical, in general? Is there any situation. In which a professional’s judgement would override that?

If the answer is no to both situations, then there’s nothing wrong with my argument. It illustrates the point that “professional judgement,” is not a good tool for deciding which ethical rules are valid and which are not.

You're back to asserting that without anally following guidelines no professionals would know what to do.

Not quite: Professional judgement includes knowing and understanding the ethical rules that apply to each situation. There is no mechanism by which a professional says,”Eh, I reject that ethical rule as invalid.” If it’s true for “sex with patients,” and “providing ineffective treatments,” the. It’s true for the Goldwater Rule.

Nowhere in medicine does any provider not consider professional judgement superior in multiple cases. It's even taught that way in med school. Evidence based medicine, yes, but sometimes it doesn't fit the situation.

This is nonsense. Doctors are not taught to consider their judgement superior to standards of practice and ethics. That sounds like institutionalized egotism.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

My argument is: Professional Judgement is not a good tool for deciding which ethical rules are valid and which are not.

Yeah, and your argument is stupid.

This is nonsense. Doctors are not taught to consider their judgement superior to standards of practice and ethics. That sounds like institutionalized egotism.

There's no way to help you understand this. But at least try to use legit examples and analogies.

AMA re Ethics

The AMA was founded in part to establish the world’s first national codification of medical ethics. Widely recognized as the most comprehensive ethics guide for physicians who strive to practice ethically, the opinions in the AMA Code of Medical Ethics represent the official policy positions of the AMA.

Do you understand why it's a guide and not some absolute law? Why choose that particular word?


AMA Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 4.2.7

The Principles of Medical Ethics of the AMA do not prohibit a physician from performing an abortion in accordance with good medical practice and under circumstances that do not violate the law.

You don't think there are professionals that disagree with this ethical position?

Why does this differ from other ethical rules people do not agree on?

Here's another one that not everyone agrees with:
Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 5.6

The duty to relieve pain and suffering is central to the physician’s role as healer and is an obligation physicians have to their patients. When a terminally ill patient experiences severe pain or other distressing clinical symptoms that do not respond to aggressive, symptom-specific palliation it can be appropriate to offer sedation to unconsciousness as an intervention of last resort.

It's not ethical to do either of these in a Catholic Hospital.

 

[xjx388]

Yeah, and your argument is stupid.

That might have been very satisfying for you to write, but it isn’t responsive. Hope it made you feel better, though.

There's no way to help you understand this. But at least try to use legit examples and analogies.

AMA re Ethics
Do you understand why it's a guide and not some absolute law? Why choose that particular word?

If you read past the highlighted part, you would see the words, “who strive to practice ethically.” Is it ok to not strive to practice ethically?

I don’t see the significance in the word “guide.” You are right in the sense that the ethics code isn’t law. But, that word doesn’t create an implication that it’s merely a set of guidelines to pick and choose. If you want to practice ethically, there’s the guide to do it.

AMA Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 4.2.7
You don't think there are professionals that disagree with this ethical position?

What does not agreeing to that ethical opinion look like? The doctor doesn’t perform abortions. There is no ethical rule that says doctors must perform abortions so the choice not to is also ethical.

Why does this differ from other ethical rules people do not agree on?

Its a permissive rule: you can do this if you choose to without breaching ethics. You can also choose not to do it.

Here's another one that not everyone agrees with:
Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 5.6
It's not ethical to do either of these in a Catholic Hospital.

It’s not unethical not to do them either.

Bad examples. You need to find restrictive rules: Don’t do this. With a restrictive rule, there is no “it’s still ethical if you choose to do it.”

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Doctors are not taught to consider their judgement superior to standards of practice and ethics.

Basically it sound like you just don't know what you are talking about (and have a very odd fixation to boot). It sounds like you think the phrase "professional judgement" means to do what the doctor wants without any consideration of guidance whatsoever. Professional judgement is what guides every decision a doctor makes and it is supposed to an informed judgement that takes in to consideration everything the doctor knows on the subject including relevant codes of ethics. It is taught as being primary and informed. It was pointed out to me last evening that the three alternative graduation oaths cited to graduates of U of A Medical School mention exercising judgement, two of them in their first sentence. And in the real world all codes of ethics on significant subjects have gray areas and contradictions. It's up to professional judgement to sort it out in any specific instance.

 

[Belz...]

That's all stuff that you yourself have observed.

Yes but pros may be better at intepreting publically-available evidence.

 

[xjx388]

Basically it sound like you just don't know what you are talking about (and have a very odd fixation to boot).

Do you think the APA knows what it’s talking about?

It’s telling, I think, that so many arguments here focus on me: I have D-K, I don’t know what I’m talking about, I have odd fixations, etc etc ad nauseum.. Very few arguments have addressed the very clear opinions of the professional organizations and their rebuttals to all the arguments raised here.

If I were you I’d focus on that and not so much on me. I have cited ample evidence that the organizations (the AMA, both APAs) responsible for creating the ethics code do not see this as an acceptable exception to ethics code.

It sounds like you think the phrase "professional judgement" means to do what the doctor wants without any consideration of guidance whatsoever.

Really? Even though I specifically said that’s not what professional judgement is all about? Even though that’s clearly what SG thinks and I’ve been arguing against?

Perhaps if you took a little time to actually consider the words I write, you wouldn’t be so confused.

Professional judgement is what guides every decision a doctor makes and it is supposed to an informed judgement that takes in to consideration everything the doctor knows on the subject including relevant codes of ethics. It is taught as being primary and informed.

I have no quarrel with that at all; it’s my position, restated.

Professional judgement includes consideration of ethics. Such consideration does not entail outright rejection of clear ethical guidance. The professional is not above the profession.

It was pointed out to me last evening that the three alternative graduation oaths cited to graduates of U of A Medical School mention exercising judgement, two of them in their first sentence. And in the real world all codes of ethics on significant subjects have gray areas and contradictions. It's up to professional judgement to sort it out in any specific instance.

What I said was: “Doctors are not taught to consider their judgement superior to standards of practice and ethics.” That is 100% true and it does not conflict with what you wrote above.

Is Andrew Wakefield’s (MD who lost his license because of his anti-vax activism) professional judgement superior to ethical codes and standards of practice? No it isn’t. The idea that professional judgement somehow replaces standards is ridiculous on its face.

You talk about grey areas and contradictions. However, in this particular case, there is no grey area or contradiction. There is very clear ethical guidance on whether or not to publicly speak about people they’ve never met. As such, how can you argue that professional judgement can lead to outright rejection of ethical codes? That is also ridiculous on its face.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Do you think the APA knows what it’s talking about?

Yes. You're not the APA.

 

[Stacyhs]

Aren't you all getting dizzy reading this? Round and round and round we go....

 

[xjx388]

Yes but pros may be better at intepreting publically-available evidence.

Pros are still people, subject to the same biases we all have.

 

[Belz...]

Pros are still people, subject to the same biases we all have.

Yyyyes but being pros they have more knowledge and expertise on the subject matter and, usually, we give more weight to their opinions... unless you think expert opinion isn't worth more than layman opinions.

 

[xjx388]

Yes. You're not the APA.

If you think the APA knows what they are talking about, then what does it matter who I am?

If you think I’m misrepresenting their position, I’m all ears.

 

[xjx388]

Yyyyes but being pros they have more knowledge and expertise on the subject matter and, usually, we give more weight to their opinions... unless you think expert opinion isn't worth more than layman opinions.

Why do we give more weight to their opinions? I think that’s a big problem here. If Dr. Oz tells you your astrological sign influences your health, do you give weight to that opinion?

I give weight to professional opinions not the opinions of professionals.

 

[xjx388]

Aren't you all getting dizzy reading this? Round and round and round we go....

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/716695e4ae87dc59f7.jpg[/qimg]

How is this thread any different than any other thread on this forum? If you find it dizzying, you can always get off the merry-go-round.

 

[Belz...]

Why do we give more weight to their opinions? I think that’s a big problem here.

No, I don't believe you. I think you go see a physician for ailments, a car mechanics for automobile problems, and a plumber for a running faucet.

You don't give equal weight to all opinions because the very concept is laughable.

 

[xjx388]

No, I don't believe you. I think you go see a physician for ailments, a car mechanics for automobile problems, and a plumber for a running faucet.

You don't give equal weight to all opinions because the very concept is laughable.

If you go to a physician for an ailment and the physician says you need to take this special herbal supplement he sells, is that an opinion worth giving weight to?

Like I said, I give weight to professional opinions: those opinions that result from application of the standards of practice and ethics of the profession.

I don't give weight to the opinons of professionals: those opinions that are outside the scope of the standards and ethics of the profession.

 

[Stacyhs]

How is this thread any different than any other thread on this forum? If you find it dizzying, you can always get off the merry-go-round.

Oooooooohhhhh....someone is a bit touchy.

It's different because this thread has basically turned into repeating the same things over and over with nothing new added. It all revolves around whether ethics require following the Goldwater Rule or not. At least in other threads the topics tend to evolve. This one is stuck in a repeat cycle. And, yes, I'm getting off this merry-go-round as of now. Nothing new has been said in weeks.