Sharing faith in a medical practice

[Jochi1543]

Not sure what a "faith-based family practice" is. Sounds to me as a way to keep GLBT people, unmarried people having sex, and women who've had or would like to have an abortion from having a physician.

 

 

Reminded me of a story a classmate mentioned where a patient he saw during family med shadowing came out to him as gay within like 5 minutes of their conversation - he had been with that practice for like 20 years and never mentioned it to the physician. Shows you what level of rapport some physicians have with their patients.

[Cnussey]

That's true - one must be qualified to teach. But when Jesus sent out his disciples to reach the world, he didn't tell them to get a masters in theology first... In my opinion, and this is a religious belief so non-Christians should ignore this next part - all Christians are entrusted with the duty of proclaiming the message of God in a way which demonstrates God's love for the world (Matthew 28, 2 Tim 2). Religious institutions exist for a reason - authorizing certain individuals to speak for the whole group is important. But at a micro-,relational- level, Christians are all called to share their faith.

 

While I understand and don't completely disagree, the disciples WERE educated. They chased around Christ and He educated them. You are going to run into a lot of risks if you are going to promote a religion without going through the proper channels. Just imagine, for fun, running an NDP clinic and advocating NDP beliefs--do you think the NDP party would be impressed? Not likely. There are sooo many fine lines that you would be crossing, especially in the medical field. Like I said, I believe in holistic care, but it is difficult and you would be wise to just have a list of professionals posted by your phone rather than to tackle these issues yourself.

 

And should someone be educated before they preach? Absolutely. You have no idea how tedious and difficult issues can develop into--far more than just "eternal salvation, love, etc.". I can tell you are protestant (I am too protestant for my husband's liking, really), but there are still significant theologies in place behind Christianity that takes significant time and study to be able to discuss and articulate them to people who ask you these questions. You are opening a big can of worms, just helping people "see God" or however you want to put it won't be the only issue if you choose such a path.

[astrogirl]

Here's an example I just thought of that doesn't actually have to do with religion, but I think the principle behind it applies. I have celiac disease. It's pretty probable that if I become a family doctor, I'll have a patient one day who is diagnosed with celiac disease. It might be appropriate for me to tell them that I have it too, and to reassure them that they'll still be able to find plenty of good food to eat.

 

But I would still refer them to a registered dietician to get them started with the gluten-free diet. Now, I know a lot about the gluten-free diet. I know in detail what has gluten and what doesn't, and I know how to make some pretty decent rice bread. But a dietician has access to resources and information that I might not, and a dietician is also specifically trained to teach people about that sort of thing. As a family doctor, I would not have the same training and the same resources that the dietician would. My dietician that I see has coupons and free samples and has called around to all the restaurants in the city to get lists of gluten-free menu items. My family doctor of course knows what gluten is, but she doesn't have all of those same resources.

 

I think the principle there can be applied to a patient who wants religious info. Even though I have a lot of religious knowledge, I'm not an expert and I'm not specifically trained to help people with that sort of thing, so it would be better to refer the patient to someone who is. And Cnussey brings up an excellent point about the legal issues involved.

[Cnussey]

Here's an example I just thought of that doesn't actually have to do with religion, but I think the principle behind it applies. I have celiac disease. It's pretty probable that if I become a family doctor, I'll have a patient one day who is diagnosed with celiac disease. It might be appropriate for me to tell them that I have it too, and to reassure them that they'll still be able to find plenty of good food to eat.

 

But I would still refer them to a registered dietician to get them started with the gluten-free diet. Now, I know a lot about the gluten-free diet. I know in detail what has gluten and what doesn't, and I know how to make some pretty decent rice bread. But a dietician has access to resources and information that I might not, and a dietician is also specifically trained to teach people about that sort of thing. As a family doctor, I would not have the same training and the same resources that the dietician would. My dietician that I see has coupons and free samples and has called around to all the restaurants in the city to get lists of gluten-free menu items. My family doctor of course knows what gluten is, but she doesn't have all of those same resources.

 

I think the principle there can be applied to a patient who wants religious info. Even though I have a lot of religious knowledge, I'm not an expert and I'm not specifically trained to help people with that sort of thing, so it would be better to refer the patient to someone who is. And Cnussey brings up an excellent point about the legal issues involved.

 

Thought my kid was celiac until testing proved otherwise. What a pain in a butt your diet is.

 

Good analogy though--and that's why I said it's okay to have a person to refer your patient to, you are still offering the required services, but it's through a professional and not based on a trust-based bias.

[itimebomb2]

While I understand and don't completely disagree, the disciples WERE educated. They chased around Christ and He educated them. You are going to run into a lot of risks if you are going to promote a religion without going through the proper channels. Just imagine, for fun, running an NDP clinic and advocating NDP beliefs--do you think the NDP party would be impressed? Not likely. There are sooo many fine lines that you would be crossing, especially in the medical field. Like I said, I believe in holistic care, but it is difficult and you would be wise to just have a list of professionals posted by your phone rather than to tackle these issues yourself.

 

And should someone be educated before they preach? Absolutely. You have no idea how tedious and difficult issues can develop into--far more than just "eternal salvation, love, etc.". I can tell you are protestant (I am too protestant for my husband's liking, really), but there are still significant theologies in place behind Christianity that takes significant time and study to be able to discuss and articulate them to people who ask you these questions. You are opening a big can of worms, just helping people "see God" or however you want to put it won't be the only issue if you choose such a path.

 

Preaching and sharing one's faith are different matters. Priests and pastors can't do the work of spreading the gospel of Christ in the world. We "little" Christians must build from the grassroots level through personal relationships and displaying love in an evident way! I have confidence that what I know (and probably what you know) as lay-Christians is enough to change someone's life. Indeed I have seen it happen.

[thebouque]

I just thought I would comment on this quote because its rather dogmatic and unfair... I would note that WW1, WWII, the American Civil War, The Vietnam War, the Cold War etc. had nothing to do with religious convictions but everything to do with political convictions. The Popes who started "crusades" into the middle east are not, and would never, by any stretch of the imagination, be considered true Christians.

 

From a political perspective, countries based on Christian values (America, UK, continental Europe, Australia) generally enjoy the highest standard of living, and the strongest social structures in the world. These benefits can be directly attributed to their founding principles. Think of the American Civil War - Abraham Lincoln - God created all man equal.

 

I would also note that religious institutions (mainly Christian) are also responsible for most of the world's charity organizations (Red Cross, Salvation Army, YMCA, Feed the Children -- 5 of the top 10 charities in America were started as explicitly Christian outreaches -http://www.forbes.com/2005/11/18/largest-charities-ratings_05charities_land.html)

Not to mention that the average Christian donates a significant amount more time and money to charitable organizations (http://www.givingandvolunteering.ca/files/giving/en/n-vc1sen.pdf)

 

Don't hate on religion. Religion doesn't hate you. In fact it loves you, and you owe a lot to it.

 

WW2 you're kidding me? how many jews died during that war? You're gonna tell me that religions were not involved? any way I highly suspect that you're a TROLL, yes, I think you're TROLLING

[Cnussey]

Preaching and sharing one's faith are different matters. Priests and pastors can't do the work of spreading the gospel of Christ in the world. We "little" Christians must build from the grassroots level through personal relationships and displaying love in an evident way! I have confidence that what I know (and probably what you know) as lay-Christians is enough to change someone's life. Indeed I have seen it happen.

 

Perhaps, but you are speaking about care. You are speaking about people who come to you for comfort and advice about their bodies and lives. You cannot just love them and show them Christian love and be done with it. If you are going to go this route, then you have to have all your angles covered. You cannot offer yourself as a Christian-based clinic without having the necessary training to deal with what you'll end up with.

[A-Stark]

As a Christian, sharing my faith is an integral part of what I believe. Does anyone have insight as to what is an appropriate way to go about this in a medical setting?

 

For example - if I owned my own private practice, would it be unethical to share the Christian message as a part of my clinical practice during medical interviews?

 

I don't think it's unethical, but it's extremely - and I mean extremely - unprofessional.

 

I realize there is an element of professionalism and the fact that a physician is in a power of authority (coercion etc)... But as one other put it, if a doctor had a cure to cancer, it would be unethical of him/her to withhold it from others. I believe that the human condition can only be reconciled by Godly intervention... i.e. salvation by Jesus which leads to eternal life... Eternal life would be better than a cure to cancer, wouldn't it? That is... if you believe in it.

 

I think there's a real possibility that this would explicitly violate various codes of conduct. You have an ABSOLUTE obligation as a physician to offer diagnostics and opinions coincident to your professional training and competencies. Bringing your personal beliefs or opinions is unprofessional.

[itimebomb2]

WW2 you're kidding me? how many jews died during that war? You're gonna tell me that religions were not involved? any way I highly suspect that you're a TROLL, yes, I think you're TROLLING

 

thats a joke, right? because if not, that has got to win an award for one of the most ignorant statements of all time.

 

Perhaps, but you are speaking about care. You are speaking about people who come to you for comfort and advice about their bodies and lives. You cannot just love them and show them Christian love and be done with it. If you are going to go this route, then you have to have all your angles covered. You cannot offer yourself as a Christian-based clinic without having the necessary training to deal with what you'll end up with.

 

yes I'd agree that to share one's faith in such a context would probably require some solid foundation as well.

 

I don't think it's unethical, but it's extremely - and I mean extremely - unprofessional.

 

I think there's a real possibility that this would explicitly violate various codes of conduct. You have an ABSOLUTE obligation as a physician to offer diagnostics and opinions coincident to your professional training and competencies. Bringing your personal beliefs or opinions is unprofessional.

 

I see your point here. This is the kind of opinion I was looking for. thanks

[WaveSense]

It is highly unprofessional and I seriously recommend that you evaluate what you plan to say to your patients. Just because YOU don't believe you are coming off preachy or imposing your religious beliefs on others, doesn't mean THEY don't think so as well. In the end its all about what the PATIENT thinks about the visit.

 

In all of my interactions with physicians, never have I heard any mention of god or any spiritual/religious views and beliefs. You are a professional medical doctor and that is how you should behave. You are not there to share your beliefs in God and you are not their to teach them about the bible. You are there to hear their complaints and treat their illnesses. Even telling them "Hey lets meet up later so we can talk about religion and how it can impact your life" is to me, unprofessional because you are initiating the interaction from the position of power.

 

Your posts to me come off extremely 'holier-than-thou' and you seem to already have made up your mind on the issue. Good luck to you but don't expect too many people to share your ideas.

[rogerroger]

WW2 you're kidding me? how many jews died during that war? You're gonna tell me that religions were not involved? any way I highly suspect that you're a TROLL, yes, I think you're TROLLING

 

Lots of ignorance with history on this thread. I stopped reading it after seeing the quoted post...

 

The Holocaust was about race. National Socialist ideology had nothing directly to do with religion. It centers around an idea of racial purity and the creation of a volksgemeinschaft (German community existing to further the German state). The other "non-pure" non-Northern Europeans were regarded as lebensunwertes leben (life unworthy of living based on racial beliefs). Therefore, the extermination of the Jewish, Roma etc. "ethnicity" from Europe was one of the goals of this ideology. Many of those who were sent to the concentration camps were not regularly practicing any sort of faith. They were killed not based on religious belief but on racial ideology dressed up with pseudo-scientific ideas.

 

For the NSDAP leadership the state and race was the the subsitute for religion. The NSDAP worked hard to discourage all religions. But their efforts were basically an epic fail and were stopped with the outbreak of war in 1939.

 

 

As for WWI and the Civil War this was anything but a religiously motivated war. If you think differently do yourself a favour and get off this forum and read a a good history text.

 

Vietnam was about political ideology and projection of power during the Cold War not religion.

[rogerroger]

Whatever one believes is their business. I personally could not care less.

 

But here is some general food for thought.

 

Being an staunch atheist is a belief as much as being a staunch Muslim, Christian, Jew etc.

 

I despise it when people try to convert me to their spiritual beliefs. Most people do.

 

Many of the hardcore atheists feel that they are in a different category from those who subscribe to organized religion. However, being a publicly anti-religion atheist in an effort to "convert" people to your belief is as annoying as the bible thumping person going around trying to convert people... Same thing different belief you are in essence the same.

 

Take note.

[musume]

Keep your beliefs in a magical man in the sky to yourself thanks.

[thebouque]

Lots of ignorance with history on this thread. I stopped reading it after seeing the quoted post...

 

The Holocaust was about race. National Socialist ideology had nothing directly to do with religion. It centers around an idea of racial purity and the creation of a volksgemeinschaft (German community existing to further the German state). The other "non-pure" non-Northern Europeans were regarded as lebensunwertes leben (life unworthy of living based on racial beliefs). Therefore, the extermination of the Jewish, Roma etc. "ethnicity" from Europe was one of the goals of this ideology. Many of those who were sent to the concentration camps were not regularly practicing any sort of faith. They were killed not based on religious belief but on racial ideology dressed up with pseudo-scientific ideas.

 

For the NSDAP leadership the state and race was the the subsitute for religion. The NSDAP worked hard to discourage all religions. But their efforts were basically an epic fail and were stopped with the outbreak of war in 1939.

 

 

As for WWI and the Civil War this was anything but a religiously motivated war. If you think differently do yourself a favour and get off this forum and read a a good history text.

 

Vietnam was about political ideology and projection of power during the Cold War not religion.

 

I think you're very confused. You probably did not study enough history in your life. Continue with your trolling friend.

 

Peace

[Swift Fox]

WW2 you're kidding me? how many jews died during that war? You're gonna tell me that religions were not involved? any way I highly suspect that you're a TROLL, yes, I think you're TROLLING

 

[ratatat]

I think you're very confused. You probably did not study enough history in your life. Continue with your trolling friend.

 

Peace

 

How is he confused?

 

Anyway, I'm a Christian and if I were a doc, if a patient asked me about my faith, I would tell him/her. As for the Christian clinic in Burlington, that seems fine by me. It's an overt operation, apparently.

 

Good thread, itimebomb2.

[thebouque]

Confusion of a pathological degree, usually refers to loss of orientation, which is the case for roger rabbit.

 

And to the other smart kid, you're quite smart I have to admit! (not the OP, the guy who posted the picture of the 3 kids to show me what aryans are supposed to look like)

[thebouque]

By the way I never said that Hitler had a religious purpose, I said religions were INVOLVED. Learn how to read, it's a very useful skill in med school.

 

Peace again

[Swift Fox]

By the way I never said that Hitler had a religious purpose, I said religions were INVOLVED. Lear how to read, it's a very useful skill in med school.

 

Peace again

 

[rmorelan]

Keep your beliefs in a magical man in the sky to yourself thanks.

 

someone is channeling Carlin

[thebouque]

 

good description of yourself, very insightful indeed.

[thebouque]

From now on I'll ignore you're geek pictures Swift Fox's, hope you had your nerdgasm. Another unhelpful/trolling picture and I report you.

[Mourning Cloak]

I am Christian. In fact, I'm married to a priest.

 

:confused:

[Mourning Cloak]

Listen lots

Talk some

Lecture little

 

Patients don't go to their doctors for a lecture/lesson/sermon. They go with concerns, and hope to be listened to.

 

You'll probably barely have time enough for that.

[Cnussey]

:confused:

 

Anglican Priest. LOL