The AP reports (thanks to The New Editor for the pointer):
Dr. Terry Bennett says he tells obese patients their weight is bad for their health and their love lives, but the lecture drove one patient to complain to the state.
"I told a fat woman she was obese," Bennett says. "I tried to get her attention. I told her, 'You need to get on a program, join a group of like-minded people and peel off the weight that is going to kill you.'" . . .
[The woman's] complaint, filed about a year ago, was initially investigated by a panel of the New Hampshire Board of Medicine, which recommended that Bennett be sent a confidential letter of concern. The board rejected the suggestion in December and asked the attorney general's office to investigate. . . .
"Physicians have to be professional with patients and remember everyone is an individual. You should not be inflammatory or degrading to anyone," said board member Kevin Costin. . . .
It's hard from the article to figure out exactly what the woman is complaining about; it may well be that Dr. Bennett said something harsher than what he's quoted as saying. (The complaints and other materials are apparently confidential, though if anyone has any more data on this, I'd love to hear it.) Still, if the account is correct, it's pretty troubling. And, more broadly, do we really need government regulation to keep doctors from being mean to their patients? (For a sense of the First Amendment issues raised by such regulations, by the way, see this post.)
UPDATE: Another article reports that Bennett "has 'an obesity lecture for women' that is a stark litany designed to get the attention of obese female patients. He said he tells obese women they most likely will outlive an obese spouse and will have a difficult time establishing a new relationship because studies show most males are completely negative to obese women." I can see how that would get some people upset, though I also see why the doctor might figure that this is the one way to get to people who haven't listened to his other advice. And it still seems to me that this isn't something the state medical board needs to be regulating.
Seems to apply here absent more information.
I have had several doctors tell me I was overweight. My response has always been "You are a brilliant diagnostician, aren't you? That was worth 150 dollars!"
If that is all they said, yes, of course you are right. But what is a doctor supposed to say if he wanted the patient to start taking specific measures? He needs to start by saying that the patient is overweight, it has certain consequences, and she needs to do this and that. It is his responsibility, for Pete's sake. Of course, he needs to say it in as inoffensive a way as possible, but it is his job to say it. If you think all overweight people know they they are overweight and don't need to be told, you are wrong -- for years I denied my overweight status by coming up with cockamamie denials, but finally my doc told me, in response to my complaint about legs hurting, that I was overweight and should lose weight. I did, and the pain went away.
The way I imagine this playing out is as follows: patient dies of weight-related disease (certainly heart disease, diabetes, HBP; possibly cancer, many others). Family sues physician for not convincing patient into caring for herself and losing weight.
Alternatively, physician is stern with patient. Patient files complaint with medical association and local DA (oh, did that actually happen?), then sues for emotional distress. Note that by censuring the physician, the local medical board seems to have created a codicil to medical ethics that states, "The physician has an affirmative obligation not to inflict any emotional distress upon patients, regardless of his other medical responsibilities to the patient." Thus, the patient may now sue the physician for malpractice, with a major dollop of "punitive" damages tacked on to emotional distress.
By the way, responding to goldsmith: perhaps the doctor was waiting for you to ask, "OK, what should I do about it?" [Of course, this is pure speculation: I know nothing about you, the doctor in question, and the precise circumstances involved in your story.]
That's a clue that Bennett may have said something that the patient interpreted as sexually offensive. Some people are just prudes. Even those of us who are not prudes get offended by people who assume that, as a matter of course, we simply must wish to have sex with more people more often.
cathy :-)
Not, I think, cause for legal action, but the sort of medical behaviour that would certainly cause me not to go to a doctor unless in mortal agony. Sheesh.
What I read into the article was that the doctor was extremely concerned about the health of his obese patients. He was trying to light a fire under them, and, apparently, went too far with this one woman.
Questions of tact and manner of communication have in my experience as an attorney with over 40 years of practice, been left to the professional's discretion. If a client doesn't like my manner he/she can choose not to hire me, to fire me or to let me know that they will do so if I don't change how I interact with them. Like doctors, lawyers are employed only so long as the patient/client allows that relationship to continue. Personal rapport is generally very important.
The Doctor in question was a psychiatrist. Without the general ability to establish rapport, a psychiatrist would starve, because most of their practices rely on frequent repeat visits. If they are not skilled at making a patient feel comfortable with them, one visit patients are the result.
The picture of this Doctor makes clear he is no youngster. He must have made a living in practice for quite a while. I have a hunch that this situation was an aberration that would not have made the news but for unwise chitchat from a board member or publicity from his plump patient.
Doctor: You're overweight.
Patient: I want a second opinion.
Doctor: You're ugly too.
However, speaking in a general way, the problem is usually to find some new way to get the patient to hear. Would sharpness help? Or humor? Should I try something Socratic or Rogerian? Perhaps some paradoxical approach would help? Or should I even bother, as the patient has been told this a thousand times already? Is this my own value, and best dropped altogether?
In any event, the speech was at worst rude and insensitive. Do I get to sue all rude and insensitive people in my life?
Still, we use all of our wiles to persuade those clients that our advice is correct and that they will be better off by following it than by not following it. Sometimes our advice requires our clients/patients to do unpleasant or difficult things. Often that advice is counterintuitive to the client/patient. Often it makes them angry. Still, we persist, because it is our professional duty to do so.
Enduring opposition and hostility to good advice is the somewhat like enduring a bout of chinese water torture. It feels so good when it stops. I have now earned the place in my practice where I make a simple deal with my clients: If you don't want to take my advice, find another lawyer. That simplifies my life.
I now have only six people in the world who regularly don't take my (valuable) advice without adverse consequence to them: my five adult daughters and my wife.
If this guy is a psychiatrist, and was prescribing medications for the patient which have weight gain as a listed side effect (as virtually every psychiatric drug does), then you have to wonder what other side-effects he thinks are effectively treated via haranguing his patients.
Has this doctor ever read an article in a peer-reviewed medical journal reporting on a double-blind, controlled study which shows the safety and efficacy of physician insults in treating obesity, anorexia, or any other condition? If not, what other unproven quackery does he practice? Leeches? Homeopathy? Ear candling?
cathy :-)
Note to Cathy: leeches _have_ been proven safe and effective for many conditions such as limb reattachment. And, I'd really like to see you or anyone conduct a "double-blind" study of any form of psychiatric analysis.
Lawyers may need to cause offense to their own clients far more than doctors do. Doctors have a much easier time withdrawing from the professional representation than lawyers do if litigation has commenced, and lawyers often have their fee, or part of it, subject to successful recovery in the case.
Nick
Where did you find information stating that the doctor was a psychiatrist? The articles I've read refer to him as a "family practice physician." A psychiatrist probably shouldn't be offering patients advice about their weight unless they're taking the time to keep up with the latest research in a specialty far removed from their practice area. If he were a psychiatrist, the comment about her love life would be more relevant (although still pretty idiotic), but I haven't been able to find any information other than your post here to say that he was anything other than her regular physician.
Physician patient communications should not be monitored by government administrators, be they physicians or not.