Re: >Repugnant ethics< thread Wooley/Bello

From: Robert J. Woolley (wooll005@gold.tc.umn.edu)
Wed Apr 23 16:49:06 1997


In message <Pine.HPP.3.95.970423163755.19784D-100000@champion.iupui.edu> writes: >
> Now that I have that out of the way, I will respond that if I were in a
> situation where I were hiring an OBGYN and my business was losing out to a
> practice down the street because they had a female OBGYN, I would go out
> and advertise for a female OBGYN. In fact, I think it would not be a
> violation of the law if I were to put that in teh JOB DESCRIPTION before I
> advertised. I know it is legal to advertise for a person who speaks
> english and spanish and not hire anyone who doesn't if it is in the job
> description.

Those are skills, not unchangeable personal characteristics. Methinks you misunderstand the law.

I'm disappointed, but at least we know which side of the line you stand on: pro-discrimination. Now, let's test another hypothetical. You already have one black partner, and he gets far fewer requests for appointments than the rest of the group, yet you know his technical and interpersonal skills are first-rate. You do a survy of patients to determine the problem, and your almost exclusively white patients fairly consistently indicate that they just don't like going to black doctors. Unfortunately the rest of your group is swamped and you need a new partner. You finally have it down to two equally qualified and personable candidates, one white and one black.

Now, is race going to factor into your hiring decision? If not, why are you willing to discriminate on the basis of sex, but not on the basis of race? Do you find one less repugnant than the other?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Woolley

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
St. Paul, Minnesota

I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives. -- Tolstoy





use when must restrict search to only the ob-gyn-l forum...
Enter search keywords:
Returns per screen: Require all keywords:

Return to  OB-GYN-L Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net
Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net
Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net
Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:21:42 2009

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.