#medical discrimination Tumblr posts

  • There’s so much wrong with this study.

    As someone who has basically none of these ‘attractive’ traits I’m extremely concerned that people will take this too seriously and start telling 'unattractive’ people they can’t have endometriosis. My experience with doctors tells me that some absolutely will do that. This will be used as a yet another reason to deny fat people healthcare. Another study we need to argue with to access the medicine even thin people struggle to get.

    The second problem is that they studied the “attractiveness” of these patients. They’ve used a clearly biased term, one with no objective meaning. Its informal and unprofessional. They could have just compared appearances. But they didn’t. They went and asked if people thought the patients were hot as well. Why? Seriously, why? Why did they need endo patients for this? It gives a strong impression of triviality.

    They have conflated thinness with feminineness and attractiveness. Two hundred years ago it was the other way 'round. There’s no reason fat people with ovaries are less feminine, except how we perceive them at this point and in fact they’ve been found to have slightly more estrogens than thinner people with ovaries.
    There’s just a boatload of assumptions built on our current society’s ideas of beauty and femininity which aren’t at all objective. But these people’s opinions on the patients’ bodies are treated as objective assessments of attractiveness. That’s not a thing. You may as well throw it all out anyway, because fat people with ovaries have slightly more estrogens. So, clearly our current ideas of beauty aren’t much related to hormones like this study assumes. There’s basically no reason to believe it would be if you look at history and how beauty changes over time. So, why was this study done?

    This study sucks for 'unattractive’ (ie. mostly fat, but also those with unpopular fat distributions) people and uses problematic language and makes problematic assumptions. It uses people with endometriosis (risking disadvantaging people who are not 'attractive’) to try and prove that current beauty ideals have some objective component, which is hilarious, if you know the first thing about it.
    That’s why I don’t like it.

    View Full
  • Oh yeah, I only mentioned that nurse being Jamaican earlier because honestly most of the problems I have run into have been dealing with (usually older) White British staff. Including the nurse I got hold of last time.

    Today nobody I saw fit that description, and nobody seemingly hated me on sight. For whatever reason. Hmm.

    #and no doubt i'm the one who would get called racist there #yep#personal#medical discrimination #of whatever type(s)
    View Full
  • I like Sawbones. I want to love Sawbones. But there’s something about how the podcast seems to always come so close to understanding the ways in which bigotry isn’t just present in, but perpetuated by science and then… swing and a miss.

    Let me give an example:

    On the most recent episode - where Dr. McElroy answers medical questions from viewers - she talks about whether asexuality and/or low libido would ever be listed as a problem on someone’s chart. She points out - correctly, I would argue - that someone being asexual with a low libido would not lead to them having their low libido listed as a medical problem on their chart, nor would it lead to their practitioner attempting to treat them. (Inversely, she asserts - again, correctly, in my opinion - that someone who does have a low libido and wanted it treated would have it listed as a medical problem on their chart.)

    What’s missing from this discussion is the hidden third possibility: the patient has a low libido that isn’t distressing them, but they think they should be distressed by it because they have been taught that to not have a libido is not normal. This path also has a different variant, in which the patient mentions their low libido, and the doctor perceives that as the patient complaining about it as a medical issue, and notes it on their chart and tries to treat them for it. This is what I mean by the sciences - in this case, medicine - perpetuating bigotry.

    It’s complicated, of course, because there are certain movements (anti-vaccination, essential oils, etc.) that are so radically anti-medicine that it can make you want to dig your heels in and claim that doctors know best for their patients, but that only serves to invalidate groups that are at-risk for medical discrimination, mistreatment, and abuse. Being able to look past these things is, for lack of a better term, a privilege, in the same way that people without stigmatized mental illnesses fail to see the massive gaps in mental health care.

    All in all, it’s quite frustrating, as someone who is a part of a number of marginalized groups, and has friends in a number of others, and also works tangential to health care. It’s what makes me turn off more episodes of Sawbones than I would like to. I want to live in a world like Dr. McElroy describes - one where only patients who actually have a medical problem get their low libido treated. And then I remember all the horror stories that I have heard, and I close the podcast, and I consider whether next week’s episode will be better.

    #i should... probably send her some direct feedback. but i feel like this just can't be me? #sawbones#opinion talk#medical malpractice#medical discrimination
    View Full
  • hey so uhhhhhh the role of body positivity in fat activism is different from the role of body positivity in disability activism, they are definitely connected but let’s all try to keep in mind that chronic pain (for example) is INHERENTLY unhealthy and that fatness is NOT, and you can’t always just copy-paste the same aggressively cheerful affirmations from one topic to the other

    View Full
  • This segment was written by two fat women! And that is why it is good. A nice basic primer on weight, health, and fat phobia.

    [CW: stigmatizing language for fat people, eg. the “O” words]

    View Full
  • littlejowo replied to your post “Hello, very sorry to bother, i just have a question. I talked with a…”

    Transmeds don’t even realize that “tucutes” aren’t the ones making it harder for “real” trans people to transition. It’s transphobic insurance companies and doctors. You know, the ones who lie about hormones being a limited resource (even though thousands if not millions of cis people take them for a variety of reasons, which is possible due to the abundance of HRT resources)

    If a trans person is denied care, it’s not because someone has used neopronouns, or didn’t suffer from gender dysphoria I was able to get HRT, fully covered by my insurance (aside from a monthly $10 co-pay), before I ever got my dysphoria diagnosis And I was very open about being non-binary (genderflux) You know how I did it? Because my doctor wasn’t a transphobic piece of feces

    Yeah like, I’ve been denied access to trans healthcare despite having dysphoria, as have loads of others. Not because of the threat of ‘transtrenders’ but because I didn’t fit the exact stereotype my medical gatekeepers wanted me to be.

    Trans healthcare has been declared medically necessary across essentially all major health orgs in the west, with loads of supporting documentation that (while flawed) presents overwhelming positioning for trans healthcare as necessary for insurance to cover, and yet loads of insurance companies don’t because they don’t actually care what the medical community says. Something can be deemed medically necessary by all healthcare pros and researchers, and insurance companies will still cut coverage to save whatever tiny amount of coin they’d save. 

    Doctors and insurance providers hold the power. They act as arbiters on who gets access to healthcare, who gets access to ID changes, etc. Transmedicalists and truscum run on the idea that medical professionals and insurance companies are just and play by some pre-set collection of rules where if certain conditions are met on the definition of trans people, they will provide unfettered access and coverage for the trans people that fit that description, whereas that’s just not the case. 

    Defining trans people by experiencing dysphoria won’t help trans people get better access to medical resources and coverage. Defining being trans as a medical condition won’t help trans people get better access to medical resources and coverage. Disavowing and dismissing non-binary folks, and/or folks without dysphoria, it  won’t help trans people get better access to medical resources and coverage. It’s never worked out like that. 

    View Full
  • Thinking again that the main reason I have run into so many problems trying to deal with the NHS that I’m currently just having to go without treatment for some serious health problems is probably a combo deal.

    Mainly consisting of (a) more things working against me wrt discrimination, and (b) much less/not as effective support available as a disabled foreigner trying to navigate an unfamiliar system. Set up so that it’s much harder to just find someone else to see who might treat you more like an actual person, rather than a weird and exasperating waste of increasingly limited time and resources.

    Add in © getting sicker making it harder for your autistic ass to even hold onto communicative speech on a normal day–much less in a more stressful situation–and that can further complicate just about anything.

    (And I have to say that the current state of the US healthcare system likely does not help with some perceptions there. On a couple of fronts. Kinda tying in with the too-popular scapegoating of “NHS tourists” as somehow responsible for the austerity undrrfunding mess. People working in the system are not magically exempt.)

    At least I am less inclined to blame myself for all of the difficulties now, while well aware that probably 90%+ of people not facing the same combination of garbage totally would. Still very short on feasible workarounds, though.

    #no rebogs please #venting#personal #access to healthcare #medical discrimination#disability #i try not to rant about this shit too much #but it's not a good situation #life threatening
    View Full
  • [ image description is screenshot of tweet by @rhymeswithvery that says, “when a doctor dismisses my symptoms, I say I want it noted in my chart – while I wait – that *they’ve chosen* not to run any tests. They then run tests. I recommend this approach to anyone facing discrimination instead of diagnostics. (I have 2 autoimmune disorders.)” dated July 26, 2018. ] 

    From the comment section another commenter added an important addition, leaving their name out for privacy: “So this is going around. First off more test does not mean better treatment. It means expensive test that will tell you the same thing I just told you. 

    I’m 100% fine with documenting why I won’t order a test. I generally do that anyway as part of my assessment and decision making process in the note. This is why people want less trained clinicians. 

    They don’t know how to do a differential diagnosis or come interpret data from the human body so they order a boatload of test and you feel like they have done something. 

    They need those test because they don’t know what they are looking for. If you don’t trust you physician.. That’s fair. Find another one. We all know racism and sexism exist in medicine.

     If you trust your physician bullying them into ordering unnecessary test isn’t helpful for you or them. There is a reason we train for over a decade. We are better than Google folks. For real. There was a study done and everything.”

    View Full
  • Throwback to when I came out to my psychologist as ace and was taken off of my MUCH needed meds for depression and PTSD, specifically the night terrors, that I still haven’t gotten back on yet because it’s “affecting my libido”

    I think being able to sleep is more important than my libido TBH but hey, cishets don’t understand and don’t care about anyone who’s not cishet.

    #reminder that this is a common thing #aces face medical discrimination for being ace #aphobia#ace discourse#medical discrimination#tw medication
    View Full
  • When your care “of the highest quality” is such that people feel safer staying away–and just trying to live with untreated conditions like diabetes–that says something.

    #but no they're just crazy #personal #access to healthcare #medical discrimination
    View Full
  • There is this ridiculous assumption…

    That autistic children of today are all getting professionally diagnosed by age three or four…

    As an educator, I can tell you that is complete crap. And this assumption is toxic for all autistics who weren’t diagnosed early on.

    There are still plenty of children falling through the cracks thanks to stereotypes and the gender/race baises of the medical and education communities and society.

    One of my friend’s three kids are self diagnosed and both the school district and the medical community are giving her issues on getting them professionally diagnosed. And without professional diagnosis, they can’t get the services they need.

    Some of the “difficult students” are really disabled students who are undiagnosed or are diagnosed but aren’t having their educational needs met.

    Then for those getting diagnosed recently but who are kids of school age, teens, and especially adults, grasping with the system of services that you haven’t been apart of pretty much your entire life and now have to learn about possibly on your own (or your parents have to figure out on their own) because the medical and/or education communities are less than helpful (or in the case of adults, the services might not be there at all) can be dizzying.

    We still have a long way to go. What would help is rephrasing of the statistic the neurotypicals use for fearmongering. The “1 in 68 children…” one. There’s two problems right there. Only including children ignores the fact that autistic adults exist (autism doesn’t stop at 18) and that adults can be diagnosed as autistic because of the aforementioned cracks in the system. But it promotes another problem. The flawed and nonexistent gender ratio. That ratio would automatically drop if adults were included in the “1 in X” statistic as many of those being diagnosed as adults are cis female or afab (getting diagnosed as autistic while openly trans is another issue all of itself). Plus both ratios are continuously incorrect while every autistic who isn’t cis white middle class male still stuggles to access a professional diagnosis who wants/needs one. And then it will still be off because there are people who won’t be counted because obtaining a professional diagnosis is more of a risk than a benefit, and their self diagnosis is still valid.

    View Full
  • This is what was with the mail that said I was denied coverage for birth control. It’s blatant discrimination against women to deny me necessary medical care.

    #medical discrimination#women’s rights #religion should not trump women #why is god a reason to openly discriminate against women?
    View Full