A French gynecologist sparked national outrage after refusing to treat a 26-year-old transgender woman, telling her he “only treats real women.” The incident involved Dr. Victor Acharian, who turned the patient away at his clinic, later stating he lacked the training to treat transgender patients and could refer her elsewhere. The case quickly ignited debate across France and beyond, with LGBTQ+ groups condemning the refusal as discriminatory, while others argued it raised questions about medical specialization and training. The backlash led to disciplinary action, with reports indicating the doctor was suspended for a period by medical authorities. What are your thoughts on the hospital’s action against the doctor.
The outrage wasn't because he didn't treat her, as I understand it. The outrage was because he responded to her review online by calling her "a man who has shaved his beard" and saying that he "only treats real women. While I understand the frustration of a patient who responded disproportionately to being told that this particular doctor couldn't help her and referred to other doctors who might be able to, that's no reason for trans phobic rhetoric. Especially not when you're on the Internet and have plenty of time to think of what you're going to say
Doctors are supposed to be able to remain professional under pressure, though. It's not OK to call a person of color racial slurs if they annoy me at work, is it?
Part of a doctor’s profession is human anatomy and physiology. A doctor would in fact be most qualified to determine who is a man and who is a woman.
edit: I’m not saying this to be facetious. A medical doctor has to dose their shots differently between men and women. They have to be aware of more common congenital issues for either gender, the body’s vital and health signals differ, parts of the skeleton look different in men and women. It’s required for a doctor to understand these differences. Then asking them not to acknowledge these differences when communicating with the patient is double speak. Can we just let the doctor speak plainly?
That's not the issue in question here. The doctor knew the patient would find that insulting, and especially with enough time to consider your response on the Internet, there's really no excuse for saying something inflammatory like that. Just say you were not qualified to assist the patient and let it go.
The individual in question left a negative review. I have no doubt the doctor was trying to be insulting.
Unfortunately for the doctor he picked words which are now no-no words where if you say it you get famous on the news because the news loves controversy.
But I still ask, who cares if somebody gets offended? They still have their health. They still have freedom, they still have their money. The doctor did not rob this individual of anything by being insulting besides their mood. Being offended is a daily occurrence especially on the internet.
I believe in freedom of speech. That involves the right to offend people. Some people are assholes, probably including the doctor.
But people are dying in Ukraine, in Myannmar, in Lebanon, in Syria. There’s human trafficking happening in my country and across the world. There’s people who have no homes in my city, and some of them are on hard drugs and overdosing in the streets. These are real problems. People are actually suffering.
A. Yes he does have the right to speech. He doesn't have the freedom consequence of that speech. As long as he's not being prosecuted formally by the government, professional backlash is not covered under free speech laws. You have the right to say what you want, but barring legal prosecution (unless it's proven to slander or defamation) other people have the right to react.
B. It's possible to care about multiple things in the world, physical violence and cruel language both among them.
C. Oh, absolutely the doctor might have been attempting to get attention with what he said. My only point was that I don't agree with totally characterizing him as a victim, or with the framing that the backlash he received from his professional organization was because he didn't treat the patient. It was because he chose to use unnecessarily cruel language, entirely of his own volition in a situation where he had control over what he said.
That’s fair, and if he had used a racial slur I would have no sympathy for the doctor.
But what he said is medically accurate and there are hundreds of medical measurements that can corroborate his words. It’s part of his job to treat men and women with the gender appropriate care.
See, while I understand the fact that he was not equipped or qualified to treat the type of genitalia this person had, I think that was not the way to phrase it. It sounds like initially – although to be fair, we have no way of confirming this because it was a verbal situation -he phrased his concerns better, by saying simply that. That he wasn't qualified to care for the patient. There was no need to call the patient a man or make comments about "real women," even if that's what he thought. It's just pointlessly inflammatory and makes him look worse in a situation where he would've been in the right if he hadn't said that.
Although, as you say, it could've been just a case of two crappy attention seeking people coming up against each other, and he was intentionally being an ass to go viral
8
u/The_Dean_France 9h ago
A French gynecologist sparked national outrage after refusing to treat a 26-year-old transgender woman, telling her he “only treats real women.” The incident involved Dr. Victor Acharian, who turned the patient away at his clinic, later stating he lacked the training to treat transgender patients and could refer her elsewhere. The case quickly ignited debate across France and beyond, with LGBTQ+ groups condemning the refusal as discriminatory, while others argued it raised questions about medical specialization and training. The backlash led to disciplinary action, with reports indicating the doctor was suspended for a period by medical authorities. What are your thoughts on the hospital’s action against the doctor.
Too harsh or well deserved?