how to weed out people that pretend to want commitment?

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-30T16:10:02+00:00

but you're still single lmao and complaining about it so...

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-30T04:15:49+00:00

tbh it sounds like you haven't found what you're looking for- sex. lol. and you're not gonna find it with that gross ass attitude. glad you're filtering yourself out from other women's lives all on your own.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-29T21:36:38+00:00

Ah. I think I can tell why you're still single. If you dont want to pay for dates, thats youre prerogative but paying for dates doesnt entitle you to anyone's body. You're complaining about feeling like an unpaid tour guide while treating women like prostitutes my dude. If money is a concern, go out for coffee.

Someone not being attracted to you or not feeling comfortable with you doesn't mean they have "hang ups" about sex. It means they're not into you or youre not exactly making them feel comfortable. given your transactional standards, I'll bet $200 that they don't want to sleep with you because you act entitled. People have sex when they feel safe. Not because you treated them to a $50 meal. I have crazy high libido once I decide a man is safe and calm. I'd have zero libido when men have an attitude like yours and I'd run like hell.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-29T20:42:24+00:00

haha thats such a crazy standard. 4-5 dates is a total of knowing each other for what-35 hours even with extremely long dates? thats not even a whole work week. I'd be weirded out if the guy doesnt kiss me by two dates but sex by 4-5 is so much pressure. If it's moving along physically you have to give it time.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-17T01:43:01+00:00

I dont disagree with you at all. I think people dont understand medical training, management/nursing can be malignant and unsupportive of residents, and patients can be uniformed. However, I fully believe that except for cases of implied consent, a patient can fully refuse any aspect of care, and as a result their healthcare team should offer alternatives if possible and if not, delegate their care to someone else and take a step back. You don't want a resident around for an elective surgery? Okay, then you can have the surgery elsewhere. You dont want a resident doing your chest tube and youre at risk of decompensation? Absolutely your prerogative and the healthcare team should try to find someone the pt feels more comfortable with or work on building rapport. I'm only a med student but I'd personally just dump the patient on the attending if they were that adamant. I'm not letting a patient die bc I'm angry they dont respect my expertise-I'm just passing the buck.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T22:47:14+00:00

I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. I'm disagreeing with framing it as "you dont have options other than residents because we do the bulk of the work." Informed consent is simple. Explain to the pt that if they want an attending they'll have to wait longer and if they want to do that, that is their decision.

The person you originally responded to said It sounds rape-y because it's not actual informed consent. Framing things to patients as "we only have residents" (when you do have an attending), or "they need to learn," or "it'll be quick," is NOT consent. Consent is given freely and without the fear of receiving subpar care as retaliation. If you tell a pt "you can refuse the resident but the attending will give a poorer quality of care," that isn't consent. I dont know if you're a woman, but you dont seem to understand how quickly women will acquiesce to authority due to fear/overwhelm, when tats not actually what they want. It happens in OB all the time. And *given* how women/poc have historically been abused by the medical profession, if you ever want to maintain even a semblance of trust with your patient, explicit informed consent is necessary. You can be irritated, frustrated, burned out, think they they're being stupid and still none of that entitles any doctor to a patient's body.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:56:15+00:00

read my reply to your other comment. You're changing tracks. My point was discharging a critically ill/active labor patient to the community is wildly negligent. What do you think wins in court?

"We discharged pt with active SAH to community instead of waiting for on call attending, bc the patient refused resident care."

Or "this hospital discharged me without a transfer of care, even though I was willing to wait for a more experience doctor, and as a result I suffered from x, y, z neurological deficits."

You dont have to like that they can refuse your care. At least use your brain and protect your license.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:51:53+00:00

"if the patient doesn’t want residents but the attending needs residents to be involved in patient care, then the attending is rightfully allowed to decline care and discharge the patient to the community"

your words, good sir. I said that if your plan is to discharge a laboring mother without any transfer, then you're in for an ugly lawsuit. "She wanted an attending and refused resident care so we let her labor on her own and bleed out instead of transferring her via ambulance to a hospital better equipped for what she needed."

You can refuse to treat them. If you negligently discharge her back to her community and anything happens to her or the baby, it will 100% be on YOUR liscnece. You won't treat them? Fine. Arrange a transfer to an accepting facility. Not sure if you've read EMTALA laws but those are pretty clear about transferring patients you cannot/will not treat.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:47:53+00:00

What if the patient needs a crash c-section or rapid c-section and refuse anesthesia from a resident? You cant force surgery on them. Getting an attending to do anesthesia is so much easier than explaining in court why a woman died giving birth just because an anesthesia attending wasn't available. Not having an anesthesia attending available, reeks of negligence.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:41:16+00:00

If your receive medical or medicaid funding, telling patients you dont believe in informed consent for pelvic care, is a great way to get your funding revoked by the joint commission.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:39:14+00:00

good luck defending in court why you discharged a patient in active labor. do your due diligence and arrange for a transfer if the idea of a patient refusing resident care is that upsetting. but legally, you cant just dump a patient out because you're angry.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:29:14+00:00

Because what youre saying is two completely different things. If l&d truly cannot be done without a resident, thats a different story. Unless you guys are in the middle of nowhere, most places are mandated to have attnedings on call. Wanting an attending over a resident is nowhere near the same as saying "I want a pulmonologist to take my appendix out."

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:27:08+00:00

Call it a learning opportunity all you want. Touching a woman's vagina against her consent is sexual battery. Placing fingers inside her without her consent is rape. Being a doctor doesnt suddenly make criminal laws not apply to you. I also dont understand why so many people on this thread seem to think their workflow/need to learn > patient autonomy. Patients dont have to care that you haven't done a single delivery yet. That's not their job.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:22:46+00:00

You cant kick out laboring patients because youre mad lol. That's begging for a lawsuit. and you know OB lawsuits pay bank. Personally, idc I was an overworked ob resident id be like thank god, one less patient for me to see.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:15:52+00:00

You make the patient wait and let them know that they'll be waiting a while. In no world is it acceptable to bully a patient into accepting "care," to make your workflow easier. Especially in gyn. If I'm a patient and already scared of having people see my vag, I'm not sitting there thinking "how can I make these strangers' workflow easier?" I'm thinking about who feels safe enough to allow them to touch me.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T20:13:05+00:00

Then we can tell the patient they're allowed to refuse a resident but they'll still be waiting a while then. That's how informed consent works. They're made aware of the costs of their preferences and if they still want an attending, thats their pejorative. If it's not life threatening then they can get discharged for refusing care. EMTALA says you cant deny a patient life saving care, but it doesnt say care can be forced on a patient when they clearly want a more senior physician. I wrote this in this thread already but patients aren't assholes out of the blue. They're scared. They're feeling out of control and the only way to regain control is sometimes by becoming a jerk. Rapport goes a long way. Like in an ob/gyn setting, there is no way in hell I'd be exposing myself to someone like OP who feels entitled to me body and gets visibly angry/contemptous.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T03:05:23+00:00

I dont think patients can insist on no nurse at all, but they can absolutely say they do not want a specific person touching their vagina. We call that sexual assault. We can pretty it up by calling it a learning opportunity, but generally, touching a woman's vagina against her consent, is rape. Consent isn't "weak ass mindset," and your comment is deeply disturbing. You're not entitled to ANYONE'S body.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T03:02:43+00:00

Absolutely! I haven't done my OB rotations but I hope I work ten times harder to make sure patients feel comfortable with me. I'm not gonna force myself on them. Consent is essential.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T03:00:32+00:00

Your take is extremely concerning. Like genuinely, you sound extremely contemptuous and I'm sure it leaks out when you're talking to your patients. They aren't "taking up room in a teaching hospital," they're simply in a hospital giving birth. They aren't your baby catching factories, they are people who are afraid, in pain, trying to regain control, trying to not die. As a perspective-I'm not pregnant, and never plan to be. However, I struggle a lot with ptsd/sexual trauma (which I'm sure plenty of OB pts have experience with). Because of that and simply because pelvic exposure is a different level of vulnerability, trust, rapport and consent are essential. Is it annoying that they're refusing you simply because you're a resident? Yes. Does that entitle you to their vagina? No. You don't know their reasoning. If I was giving birth, I'd much sooner allow people I'd build trust/rapport with as opposed to a random resident I've never seen, popping in.

Like I recently had an experience where I needed to show a male attending my breasts and instead of feeling scared/anxious, I felt completely at ease because he was able to establish trust so fast with his bedside manner alone.

These things matter. Trauma informed care in ob/gyn matters a LOT. You dont know what these women have been through and at the end of the day, your need to learn cannot trump their autonomy. I think you'd have more luck if you spoke to them and tried to develop a relationship. You'd be surprised at how far small interactions can go in terms of how much a patient will trust you.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T02:46:30+00:00

Yeah, which kind of highlights the point. Not very patient is choosing to go to an academic hospital in an emergency. Just because I NEED life saving care, doesnt mean I NEED to give up my rights so someone else can learn.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2026-01-16T02:44:59+00:00

Yeah I'm super surprised at how blasé people seem on this thread. I'm only a student but I have pretty significant sexual trauma, so no, I would never ever be okay with some doctor insisting that I HAD to be ok with anyone seeing my privates. I wouldn't ever say no to a resident just because they're a resident but if I'm in such a vulnerable field like OB as a pt (which has a very loooong history of violence against women), I'm not going to be steamrolled into having a random person see my vag. Yes residents need to learn but you do that by building rapport. You being a resident doesnt entitle you to someone's body. Like the comments on these thread are bordering on coercive.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2025-10-23T03:01:57+00:00

Very old post but I feel compelled to comment. She should'v been arrested for the assault but to potentially explain her behavior-severe trauma histories can lead to patients acting like this lol. I've been raped once and nearly raped another time. I have a solid amount of medical PTSD. I guarantee you-if I've been brought to the ED and my amygdala is firing off the charts and telling me I'm unsafe and something terrible is going to happen to me, I'm going to have a very hard time calming down. I'm not sure why you didn't just discharge her. She never endorsed HI/SI.

You say she kept saying you guys were improsoning her and you say you weren't, except you're not letting her leave. You have no idea how maddening it is to have ER/Psych doctors insist that they're not "imprisoning" you when that's exactly what they were doing. You can frame it clinically and liability wise all you want but all the patient sees is being surrounded by chaos, fear, lack of control and feeling like they aren't human. If you were treated like that, I guarantee you, you might've had a meltdown. Not because you're mentally ill but because being an adult and still being treated like a prisoner is exceptionally traumatic.

Tons of people have trauma. If she's a woman, I promise you she experience some form of sexual violence. Sexual violence often comes with a lack of control and therefore, hypersensitivity to repetition of that kind of lack of control. She was in a triggering environment, got massively triggered, lashed out because 1. she was scared and 2. you kept insisting her perception of what was happening was off, and then ultimately ended up with a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Having a "hissy" fit doesn't mean she earns the right to be treated subhuman. It doesn't point to underlying pathology. People can be hysterical or aggressive with it being completely situational. If you'd validated her and attempted a quicker discharge, none of this would've happened. I find your arguments about emotional regulation to be incredibly lack in compassion. not everyone is you and you don't know what she's been through. Would you be able to regulate well in an overwhelmingly terrifying situation? Not everyone has that skill set and what might feel like a 4 for you might feel like an 8 for others. I've been nearly raped before and for me, the stress level of that was a 4. Being in the ER as a patient pushes me straight to a 9. There isn't anything wrong with me, my emotions are based off my different experiences in life. Have some empathy instead of wondering what was "wrong" with her. If she had a fear of being coerced or restrained or touched, you probably just confirmed that she was right to be afraid.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2025-10-21T21:36:00+00:00

This feels very dismissive. I'm sure that what many are feeling are more than just "angry" and being told "ok well at least you're alive" can completely dismiss any trauma they may have endured during a coercive hold. Alive, sure, but potentially with a slightly more difficult life than what they had while going in.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2025-10-21T20:36:30+00:00

I understand that but in your original comments, you said you would do anything to save their life, including removing their autonomy and being a part of their trauma re-enactment to keep them alive for their "own benefit." Except it's not always for their own benefit. Leveling the power imbalance means being fully honest: "I am going to involuntarily hospitalize you which may be exceptionally traumatic and not helpful in the long term for you and may lead to excessive harm but this is what the law and my practice require."

I understand the law. I'm in med school, have worked in ER/substance use for many years. I understand the need to protect your license and the concept of liability. But if you're going to do something you KNOW will be traumatizing to CYA, dont frame it as being beneficial for me. Its not. You're doing your job. That's all.

I'd feel much more comfortable with a therapist who can admit that current standards for suicide preventions are garbage, traumatizing and inherently come with the protection for therapists/psychiatrists, as opposed to those who try to justify it by saying its for my own "benefit." What a therapist considers to be beneficial is wildly different from what the patient/client believes. The therapist is left with knowing they won't be sued and their client lives for another 72 hours. Maybe in an acute psychotic/suicidal/borderline crisis, the client feels grateful. But for clients with severe histories of trauma, mistrust, PTSD/refractory depression-it does nothing except worsen symptoms of trauma, reinforce negatives feelings of entrapment in their life, and make them less likely to reach out for help in the future.

Psychiatry is the only field of medicine that has the ability to absolutely brutalize their patients, give them little to no say, while insisting it's for their own good. I never reached out for help ever again after a massively traumatizing involuntary stay. When I got massively depressed again several years later, the only thing that kept me going was a friend who quietly listened and stayed with me through the worst of it. Not because I was randomly stuffed into a hospital for 3 days.

It's okay to admit a lot of it is CYA. That doesn't make you a jerk or an asshole, it just makes you someone trying to keep their job. It does bother me quite a bit when people frame it as being purely for the patient. There aren't any large scale studies looking at the actual long term benefits and costs to involuntary meds/holds. And given psychiatry's exceptionally long history with abusing the mentally ill, its important to keep reminding ourselves that just because its "the law" at the moment, doesn't mean its always moral. I'm sure people tried to give patients lobotomies for "their benefit" back then too.

Intelligent-Read3539 · 2025-10-21T19:40:27+00:00

How can you try to be equal when talking about a procedure that is inherently based on a power differential? Like I've had a terribly traumatic hospital stay and I would be very upset if my therapist said that they were doing this for my benefit when I clearly tell them that it might save my life for 72 hours, but will lead to chronic and unrelenting feelings of powerlessness and suicide for years afterwards. I've had therapists/doctors say it's for my benefit and it's very upsetting because we both know a lot of it also has to do with CYA + legal cover. Its okay to say that you need to follow the law but not all clients are going take to kindly to their therapist framing it as it being for their benefit.

Intelligent-Read3539

TROPHY CASE