GOT an ailment? Well, if you go to GP Dr Richard Scott, 50, for help, he’s likely to offer you “a little extra” – a dose of Christianity.
Click on pic too watch Dr Scott speaking to the Telegraph
This has not gone down well with the General Medical Council. Dr Scott – whose consulting room at the Bethesda Medical Centre in Margate, Kent, is adorned with a Bible, palm cross and rosary – is now in trouble with GMC, which has, according to the Telegraph, reprimanded him for “pushing religion” on a patient.
The mother of the patient at the centre of the complaint accused Scott of abusing his position by harassing her son during a consultation in 2010.
But the Cambridge-educated doctor and committed Christian is refusing to accept a formal warning on his record, and is instead taking legal action to fight the censure, and has scooted off to the Christian Legal Centre.
Dr Scott, 50, a married father of three, saw the patient who is at centre of the complaint in 2010.
The Telegraph huffed:
The GMC’s excessive reaction is part of a tendency: a number of institutions and companies have, in a misguided attempt to be “multicultural”, banned Christian symbols and overt expressions of faith, something that would never be attempted in the case of other religions. And yet the Christian faith is central to our country’s history and our traditions. Its legacy is visible everywhere. It is right that today, no one expects a person who holds positions of power and responsibility to be a practising Christian. But we appear to be heading towards an alarming situation in which the profession of faith becomes an active disqualification.
Hat tip: Alan

This does not, as the Torygraph says, indicate bias against christians. What it indicates is the overweening arrogance of a christian doctor who wants to foist his religion on patients who are inevitably vulnerable to persuasion. I wonder what kind of treatment and time an atheist, compared to a christian, would get from him.
Someone needs to tell this idiot he’s a doctor, not a priest.
OT: Is anyone else being served the mobile page? I found the button at the bottom to turn it off, but it doesn’t work. (Tried on Firefox, IE and Opera.)
Hmm, after commenting, I suddenly got the normal page back!
“All he did was to share his conviction that a commitment to the Christian religion could be one element that contributed to a recovery from illness.”
This is wildly inappropriate medical advice, and it is totally correct that he be censured.
Robert
So much fail in one paragraph from the Torygraph. Let’s break it down:
“The GMC’s excessive reaction is part of a tendency: a number of institutions and companies have, in a misguided attempt to be “multiculturalâ€,” – Invoking a conspiracy theory to fuel a persecution complex and putting multicultural in quotes as if it is some kind of dirty word? Not a good start for anyone wanting to come off as anything but a self-centred bigot wanting their way. And a censure is hardly an excessive reaction.
“banned Christian symbols and overt expressions of faith, something that would never be attempted in the case of other religions.” – In actuality, overt expressions of faith are perfectly permissible when they a) don’t interfere with the doctor’s job and b) are genuine requirements of the doctor’s religious practice. That is why when I see s Sikh doctor, he wears a turban and I do not care: it is not because the shadowy liberal powers that be are trying to give ‘that lot’ a leg up on the poor white Christian folk, it is because he has to wear it while Christians do not actually have to have crosses and rosaries all over the place, creating an atmosphere that suggests heavy influence of faith on a doctor’s judgement. If I went into a doctor’s room that was full of religious symbols and wanted, say, family planning advice, I would be quite concerned about its accuracy.
“And yet the Christian faith is central to our country’s history and our traditions. Its legacy is visible everywhere.” – Given the rosary being involved, there’s a good chance this doctor is a Catholic, making this statement somewhat comical. Members of his faith being burned at the stake and treated as second-class citizens without the same rights to expression, employment and property as everyone else is central to this country’s history and traditions. There’s a reason Kate Middleton could never be a Catholic. If being told to stop shoving religious symbols in the faces of patients and act like a professional amounts to ‘persecution’, then he should be proud to be continuing in the tradition of Catholic martyrs of Britain’s past.
“It is right that today, no one expects a person who holds positions of power and responsibility to be a practising Christian. But we appear to be heading towards an alarming situation in which the profession of faith becomes an active disqualification.” – Is it just me or does there appear to be some enormous disconnect in these two sentences? I’m not sure if maybe there is a typing error in the first one: by ‘right’ does the writer mean that it is something he thinks is good or something that he thinks is considered good by others or something that he thinks is at least normal? Regardless, the profession of faith IS a disqualification from performing one’s duties in a secular environment. That is how it works. Does he really want doctors using their faith to justify telling people not to get life-saving treatment like blood transfusions? When you are in medical care, that medic’s duty is first to the patient, and any doctor has to accept that the patient’s well-being comes before everything, including faith and including god. Trust a journalist to not comprehend the concept of professionalism.
@Daz – Same thing happened to me. The mobile page looked quite fancy too.
The NSS are right to castigate the Telegraph over their Mail-like approach to this story. There is an interesting comment there in which someone asks what the reaction would have been had the doctor been encouraging his patients to attend meetings of the local humanist society. Food for thought indeed!
So he went running to the CLC did he? I presume that he is aware of their track record for such cases, I’ll give you a hint Doc, they always lose.
The Telegraph’s reference to our Christian cultural legacy is irrelevant. The claim that other religions don’t get the same kind of treatment is untrue. Muslims who try to put their religion before doing their jobs properly get it in the neck as well. The tendency that they refer to is an increasing willingness for Christians to bleat about being treated exactly the same as everyone else.
@barriejohn: Suppose instead of the bible the doctor had The God Delusion on his desk? And suppose he said to patients that they might benefit from reading this?
Oh yes. The Alpha Course. I remember having grown men standing around me going whooooosh trying to bring down the holy spirit and hoping I would collapse on the floor. How medically unethical. This guy would make a better witch doctor than a professional GP
I have my doubts that Dr Scott would consider it acceptable if Christians went to be treated for their ailments and the appointments were used to invite them to mosques or atheist group meetings as “a way out”.
One wonders what “neutral” advice would be given by this doctor if his patient “admitted” to being a closet gay.
@Broga – funny enough, The God Delusion was a big help when I was suffering from depression. Raised a Catholic, I firmly believed I was destined for hell for having a weakness of the flesh (a ‘weakness’ that began with entirely involuntary nocturnal emissions). As you can imagine, for a child with a powerful imagination, that is a daunting prospect to face. I imagine there are quite a number of people who suffer from great feelings of guilt and anxiety that are exacerbated by their faith.
On the other hand, I am quite willing to believe that some people’s atheism leaves them feeling somewhat hopeless, but that is a matter of perspective rather than the POINT of atheism. Religion generally seeks to control through emotional manipulation. Anyway, naturally it would be unethical for a doctor to try to interfere in a patient’s religious practice, though I do wonder where the line would and should be drawn with religion that is causing tangible harm.
JohnMWhite: I am happy to hear that The God Delusion was a help to you. Derren Brown said that it was his favourite book of all time. Philip Pullman said “It should have a place in every school library – especially in the library of every ‘faith’ school.” Although I have been an atheist since my adolescence I still find books like this uplifting, bold and they refresh my thinking. I like the no holds barred challenge that is typical of Richard Dawkins. He doesn’t back off, he doesn’t pussy foot around.
I wonder how many christians, particularly RCs, suffer from depression from the residual and indeed present fear of hell that was indoctrinated in them as children? The fresh and invigorating air of free thought is a delight compared to that. I’m pleased you made your escape.
I happen to know the doctor who is being reviled and ridiculed by this batch of inciters to hatred commenting on this story. Richard Scott is my neighbour of 13 years and one of the finest human beings I have ever met (he would be too modest to accept such praise which proves my point).
This guy is a faith healer! He doesn’t belong treating patients, he belongs in a tent revival.
And in case suggesting patients go to church isn’t bad enough, he’s systematically drumming up business for the culty Alpha Course, This is going to be an open and shut case. For the Telegraph to not recognize this is really a disservice to their readers.
There was a “Family Fun Day” in the next town to ours, organized by the local “New Life Church”, being held while I was out shopping on Saturday, so I had a little nose around. On one of the stalls I noticed a convenient pile of leaflets on the subject of “healing”, and, though I wasn’t going to give the beggars any encouragement by taking one of the wretched things or showing any interest whatsoever, I couldn’t help noticing that, as with those appalling Chinese herbalists who infest our high streets now, the word CANCER appeared in very large print on the front cover. Perhaps I should have picked them all up and dumped them in the recycling bin!
Poor Christians. So persecuted because they can’t push their fairy tales on others with impunity any more. What is the world coming to?
To paraphrase Scrubs: “Girlfriend’s [not] gonna get paaaiiid!”
I’m always disappointed to hear of people here in Cambridge who are bible-thumpers as I spect better. A scientist myself the my feeling is that anyone properly applying science should be ditching religion pronto, unfortunately cognitive dissonance abounds.
I was recently reminded that it is not just scientists who should know better. The head of our (Combined- don’t ask me how it works) Christian Union had written in to one of the student papers to whinge about something, and begged leave to not address science due to being an historian. While that is fair enough, it occurred to me that an historian ought to be aware that their ‘saviour’ is conspicuously absent from contemporary sources and their holey [sic] book is a badly edited, contradiction strewn doorstop.
I tuned in to a programme on Radio 4 today as the speaker was from the Uni I did my post-grad at and he is something of a ‘name’ in his field, which was something my partner had studied. So we sat down with interest. He rambled all over the place without any coherent point and get banging on about God and Jesus to illustrate his idea that being open to life is fundamentally important.
I really, really did not enjoy being associated with this noxious drivel. I hoped he’d represent us well and instead he just sounded like a raving lunatic.
It was the religion which messed the whole damn thing up from the start.
I see that the Mail has taken up the cause now (sigh). It is interesting that they refer to Bethesda as a “Christian-orientated practice”, whatever that means. Presumably the proselytising goes on all the time then.
This comment illustrates perfectly the gullibility of the religious:
Who said he was preaching? I visited a friend in a Phychiatric hospital. A young woman came into the lounge as we chatted & started shrieking as she approached us. We both realised that this was a spiritual situation & the young woman was quickly removed from the lounge. Relating this experience at a Church meeting a couple of nights later, two youg woman immediately thanked me for shariing this experience. They were the sisters of this young woman & felt exactly the same as I did with regards to her illness. She had failed to respond to any drug-treatment given her. Nurses usually offer to call again when off-duty, should a patient wish to discuss the Christian faith further.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1389675/Christian-doctor-prescribed-faith-Jesus-fights-job.html
With increasing age my arteries harden, my tolerance decreases and my patience evaporates. However, one thing will never change – my enjoyment of arguing theology with misguided victims of the most successful con-game in history.
While being proselytised at when one is really ill is pretty sickening (so tell the twerp to get lost), it is good to know whether the doctor is qualified to apply a medical solution or whether they will think that praying is sufficient. This is the true purpose of religious paraphernalia.
When you start forbidding it, the wolves can hide among the lambs.
Pass a law stating that they must carry an identification (like the yellow star) and listen how loud they start screaming!
Make it illegal (like the burqa in France or the cross in Saudi) and they all start whining.
This weasel-like pussy footing around religion must stop, we need to know who lives in the real world and who thinks they are a unicorn.
An open discussion when possible and telling them to shut up when not, will put things back into perspective.
To paraphrase the Spanish minister:
the right to good treatment takes precedence over freedom of religion.
(this goes double for muslim husbands who object to doctors touching their wives.)
Yet again we see the religious pushing their beliefs down other peoples throats. When, like in this case, they get reprimanded for it, they play the victim card.
Could you imagine the reaction if I felt this strange need to push my beliefs down their throats? How, for example, would they feel, if I was to go to my local church, walk up to the pulpit, and say ‘Good morning, todays sermon is about reality and a life free from uperstition!’ They would be baying for my blood (in that kind christian manner, of course).
Furthermore, here in Glasgow, there has been an increase in street preachers, in the city centre, over the past year. I think i’ll walk up to them, hand them a blank sheet of paper, and say ‘Here are the facts about Jesus’
If it’s good enough for them……………
tony e, I see Glasgow knows how to deal with those street preachers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkfS6qZU4UM
The Torygraph[sic] and Mail comments sections are full of the usual stuck pigs squealing about being denied religious privilege.
Tim Vince. Perhaps you should tell your mate to do the job for which he is paid by the tax-payer without foisting preposterous nonsense on the sick and vulnerable.
Anonymous,
Many thank for the link, it’s made my day.
Tony