Students forced to undergo transvaginal exams in class while teacher made ‘bizarre’ comments:

Two women say they were forced to submit to transvaginal probes by their college instructors as part of their training on the medical procedure.
The students sued Valencia College and three medical diagnostic instructors — Maureen Bugnacki, Linda Shaheen and Barbara Ball – in federal court Thursday, saying they were forced to undergo the procedure weekly or face retaliation. The lawsuit claims college staff members told the students “they could find another school if they did not wish to be probed” and made suggestive comments to the women as classmates probed their sexual organs.

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/students-forced-to-undergo-transvaginal-exams-in-class-while-teacher-made-bizarre-comments-suit/

And that was just the guys.

With both hands on their shoulders?

I find both those comments totally inappropriate. You think that was funny? I doubt very much the girls did and it will probably be something they never get over.

Seriously, sass...how are they going to learn if they don't have the opportunity to perform an actual transvaginal sonogram hands-on with real people?  Some day they will have to do this for real, perhaps under life threatening circumstances.

My youngest daughter, a physician, told me in medical school they had to practice on each other all the time.  Do you think they hire live models?  They didn't think twice about it.

Well Quill, the fact they are suing would suggest that there is nothing 'normal' about it. Thankfully our doctors don't learn like that.

They progress from the class room to the dissection room, on bodies that have been donated, they then go to teaching hospitals, where they observe on patients that are asked if they give their consent so that the students can learn, they then go on to do it themselves, with a senior doctor overseeing them and again with the permission of the patient.

If they wish to practice on one another, it would be in private, with each of them consenting and never in front of a class, under coercion, with teachers and pupils making lewd remarks. If that happened to your daughter, I suggest to let her know that that is abuse and not acceptable behaviour by the staff or the pupils. However, I'd suggest that the procedure followed by American hospitals is about the same as that of British ones, or they'd have a lot more legal cases on their hands.

risingsun wrote:I find both those comments totally inappropriate.  You think that was funny? I doubt very much the girls did and it will probably be something they never get over.

I agree with you!

risingsun wrote:Well Quill, the fact they are suing would suggest that there is nothing 'normal' about it.

They will lose.

risingsun wrote:Thankfully our doctors don't learn like that.

Yes, your medical schools do the same thing.  Typically, teaching medicine is clinical, not classroom.  So very soon (2nd-3rd year) the students are hands-on with the patients.  But every diagnostic (non-surgical) procedure must be practiced, particularly the first time, on each other.  Think about it: even you cannot suggest an alternative.

risingsun wrote:They progress from the class room to the dissection room, on bodies that have been donated, they then go to teaching hospitals, where they observe on patients that are asked if they give their consent so that the students can learn, they then go on to do it themselves, with a senior doctor overseeing them and again with the permission of the patient.

And how do these "dead" bodies produce live responses?  How, for example, do you do a transvaginal sonogram on a cadaver?  What do you learn?  Anything?  What you are talking about is physiology class, and there are no live procedures practiced in physiology...only a lot of reading in Gray's Anatomy.

risingsun wrote:If they wish to practice on one another, it would be in private, with each of them consenting and never in front of a class, under coercion, with teachers and pupils making lewd remarks.  If that happened to your daughter, I suggest to let her know that that is abuse and not acceptable behaviour by the staff or the pupils.   However, I'd suggest that the procedure followed by American hospitals is about the same as that of British ones, or they'd have a lot more legal cases on their hands.

I doubt that they practice down at Piccadilly Circus or Sloane Square.  You have no idea what you are talking about.  You are just shit-stirring again.

Sorry, but you are talking total crap. Do you think you are the only one with a doctor in the family. I also used to work at Bart's Hospital many years ago and there is no way anything like that would have been tolerated.

Actually Quill, I going to look into this, as I feel some of your post may hold water.
Don't understand why you'd say sassy was shitstirring though, she she was just debating with you.
Bit unnecessary!

Bringing in "synthetic cadavers"

http://www.medicaldaily.com/synthetic-human-cadaver-be-used-medical-students-university-arizona-instead-actual-humans-262768

eddie wrote:Actually Quill, I going to look into this, as I feel some of your post may hold water.
Don't understand why you'd say sassy was shitstirring though, she she was just debating with you.
Bit unnecessary!

Obviously, by intentional habit I abandon a thread as soon as I detect the shit-stirring.  I don't engage in those infinite regress threads.  I pay attention, and when a thread turns 'we-they' (ie, in this case, American medical schools vs. UK medical schools, which has no other purpose than to raise ire) I simply call it and leave.

It's a waste of time to engage in these personality spats. If a thread is going in that direction, I don't feed it.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Actually Quill, I going to look into this, as I feel some of your post may hold water.
Don't understand why you'd say sassy was shitstirring though, she she was just debating with you.
Bit unnecessary!

Obviously, by intentional habit I abandon a thread as soon as I detect the shit-stirring.  I don't engage in those infinite regress threads.  I pay attention, and when a thread turns 'we-they' (ie, in this case, American medical schools vs. UK medical schools, which has no other purpose than to raise ire) I simply call it and leave.

It's a waste of time to engage in these personality spats.  If a thread is going in that direction, I don't feed it.

Oh come on Quill! You can be the worst culprit for that!!! Are you kidding me???

eddie wrote:Bringing in "synthetic cadavers"

http://www.medicaldaily.com/synthetic-human-cadaver-be-used-medical-students-university-arizona-instead-actual-humans-262768

Interesting, as my daughter is a graduate of the University of Arizona Medical School.

Notice those synthetics are used in surgery and are used to teach known skills, not diagnostic examinations. The former is remedial, whereas the essence of diagnostic examination is that you do now know the answer...you need a live response.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Bringing in "synthetic cadavers"

http://www.medicaldaily.com/synthetic-human-cadaver-be-used-medical-students-university-arizona-instead-actual-humans-262768

Interesting, as my daughter is a graduate of the University of Arizona Medical School.  

Notice those synthetics are used in surgery and are used to teach known skills, not diagnostic examinations.  The former is remedial, whereas the essence of diagnostic examination is that you do now know the answer...you need a live response.

Yes in can see that.
I am trying to find the "live response" thing to see if we do that here. I can't argue either way as I have no idea and actually, have never heard of it, before today, tbh.

Oh please - they were perfectly capable of saying no.

Raggamuffin wrote:Oh please - they were perfectly capable of saying no.

Well rags I rather think the point is, that they agreed as to part of their training but then felt a "Mark" was overstepped in some way.

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Oh please - they were perfectly capable of saying no.

Well rags I rather think the point is, that they agreed as to part of their training but then felt a "Mark" was overstepped in some way.

And yet they kept on agreeing to do it.

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Oh please - they were perfectly capable of saying no.

Well rags I rather think the point is, that they agreed as to part of their training but then felt a "Mark" was overstepped in some way.

Medicine and sex are easily confused.  You use the same parts, you see.

I don't see how one can enter a medical or clinical training program and not expect to participate.  It's like seeing homework as a 'mark' overstepped.  Suppose the objection were not to inserting something into my vagina, but inserting some instrument into any vagina?  Suppose you were offended by being the inserter, rather than the insertee?  I mean, if you are going to start squinching up your face and saying, ewwwwww...what are you doing there?

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Oh please - they were perfectly capable of saying no.

Well rags I rather think the point is, that they agreed as to part of their training but then felt a "Mark" was overstepped in some way.

Medicine and sex are easily confused.  You use the same parts, you see.

I don't see how one can enter a medical or clinical training program and not expect to participate.  It's like seeing homework as a 'mark' overstepped.

That's absurd! That's like saying that no one can ever overstep the mark in any given situation?
People overstep the mark in sex regularly - it's called rape, for example!

In the case of the example like in the OP, yes I could consent as part of my participating in medical training, to having my vagina probed....but if you laugh and make a lewd comment, is that okay??

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Medicine and sex are easily confused.  You use the same parts, you see.

I don't see how one can enter a medical or clinical training program and not expect to participate.  It's like seeing homework as a 'mark' overstepped.

That's absurd! That's like saying that no one can ever overstep the mark in any given situation?
People overstep the mark in sex regularly - it's called rape, for example!

In the case of the example like in the OP, yes I could consent as part of my participating in medical training, to having my vagina probed....but if you laugh and make a lewd comment, is that okay??

Well then they should have told the instructor that they didn't like the comments and asked her to stop making them.

So they were embarrassed because there wasn't enough privacy, and now their names are all over the press along with the details. I think some people need to get some perspective.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Medicine and sex are easily confused.  You use the same parts, you see.

I don't see how one can enter a medical or clinical training program and not expect to participate.  It's like seeing homework as a 'mark' overstepped.

That's absurd! That's like saying that no one can ever overstep the mark in any given situation?
People overstep the mark in sex regularly - it's called rape, for example!

In the case of the example like in the OP, yes I could consent as part of my participating in medical training, to having my vagina probed....but if you laugh and make a lewd comment, is that okay??

That's just decorum. If someone started cutting up in one of my classes, I would impose a little discipline too.

I just re-read the article. Apparently, the instructors feel that experiencing the procedure is a part of learning how to use the tool. I can understand that. It just doesn't seem to be to be that violative in a clinical setting.

“A student would place a condom over the probe and then apply generous amounts of lubrication to the probe. In some cases, the student would have to sexually ‘stimulate’ plaintiffs in order to facilitate inserting the probe into plaintiffs’ vaginas,” the lawsuit claims.

The women felt embarrassed each time, and the suit claims Ball made “bizarre” comments to one of the women – saying she was “sexy” and should work as an “escort girl.”


I've had two of these processes when I had endometrial cancer, absolutely 100% not true that you have to be sexually stimulated, in fact when it is done in practice it is done in a way that gives you every bit of privacy it is possible to have, and you are NOT exposed to the elements, so to speak. And if anyone made sexually inappropriate remark their feet wouldn't touch, staff are taught to make it as unsexual as possible, because there is nothing sexual about it, and to put the woman at ease as much as possible.

As for the crap about making is USA/England, I actually said that I would expect the teaching to be the same in both instances and the sexualisation of it would not be normal, which is why the women felt violated. The only reason you tried to make that out Quill, was that you felt ashamed of making fun of the women being abused.

risingsun wrote:“A student would place a condom over the probe and then apply generous amounts of lubrication to the probe. In some cases, the student would have to sexually ‘stimulate’ plaintiffs in order to facilitate inserting the probe into plaintiffs’ vaginas,” the lawsuit claims.

The women felt embarrassed each time, and the suit claims Ball made “bizarre” comments to one of the women – saying she was “sexy” and should work as an “escort girl.”


I've had two of these processes when I had endometrial cancer, absolutely 100% not true that you have to be sexually stimulated, in fact when it is done in practice it is done in a way that gives you every bit of privacy it is possible to have, and you are NOT exposed to the elements, so to speak.  And if anyone made sexually inappropriate remark their feet wouldn't touch, staff are taught to make it as unsexual as possible, because there is nothing sexual about it, and to put the woman at ease as much as possible.  

I don't know anything about your own medical history and it would be too much information anyway.  Returning to the topic, I have heard that certain procedures are done more easily if relaxation can be achieved.  I'm sure by 'stimulation', no more than that was intended.

risingsun wrote:As for the crap about making is USA/England, I actually said that I would expect the teaching to be the same in both instances and the sexualisation of it would not be normal, which is why the women felt violated.   The only reason you tried to make that out Quill, was that you felt ashamed of making fun of the women being abused.

The thread is not about me.  And since you have changed the subject to address me, I will take that as your admission that I'm right about the underlying topic.

Incidentally, I said nothing about the women.  My remark was intended as a droll comment on the insignificant nature of the subject.  Who thinks up this stuff?  You are acting like an anal spinster from the 19th-century to carry it on.  

As for the lawsuit, I'm sure there will be several more wry jokes of the same sort down at the Orange County Courthouse, before the case is thrown out for assumption of the risk, or failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Well Ive had these probe-like instruments myself whilst pregnant with my daughter, this was an internal early scan due to three previous miscarriages, and I was never "sexually stimulated" in order to have this procedure!???

What a load of bull crap.

It only upset them enough to sue at the end and not complain at the time ?
Yeah right

eddie wrote:Well Ive had these probe-like instruments myself whilst pregnant with my daughter, this was an internal early scan due to three previous miscarriages, and I was never "sexually stimulated" in order to have this procedure!???

What a load of bull crap.

Yes, I think it is - I don't believe a word of it. They probably had to jiggle the probe around a bit, that's all.