Full Body Scanning: A Religious Question?

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='04 March 2010 - 05:52 PM' timestamp='1267746756' post='2066749']
+JMJ+
like when? (not being snarky, generally curious) when asked, during appointments, if an intern can sit in, i say yes unless i have to undress, then i say no.
[/quote]

There are surgery techs who have only high school educations. And there are plenty of times when medical students, nurses, etc that you have never seen or know about will witness part of your surgery or a procedure...it's just the way learning occurs within the medical system. And there are plenty of individuals who might see radiological images of your body including medical students, student volunteers, nursing students, etc. The doctor is not the only person who legitimately has access to images or rooms where patients might be exposed. In many cases the patient is informed, but not always; the medical student is contributing to their healthcare by assisting the physician and therefore it makes sense that they be present during the physician's work.

You might have the luxury of independence now, but when you get older and you can no longer bathe or wipe yourself, you will likely have an ICU tech helping you with some of these tasks and these people are often individuals with high school diplomas and hospital training but no formal college-education requirement.

Edited March 5, 2010 by Veridicus

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='04 March 2010 - 07:29 PM' timestamp='1267752551' post='2066783']
There are surgery techs who have only high school educations. And there are plenty of times when medical students, nurses, etc that you have never seen or know about will witness part of your surgery or a procedure...it's just the way learning occurs within the medical system. And there are plenty of individuals who might see radiological images of your body including medical students, student volunteers, nursing students, etc. The doctor is not the only person who legitimately has access to images or rooms where patients might be exposed. In many cases the patient is informed, but not always; the medical student is contributing to their healthcare by assisting the physician and therefore it makes sense that they be present during the physician's work.

You might have the luxury of independence now, but when you get older and you can no longer bathe or wipe yourself, you will likely have an ICU tech helping you with some of these tasks and these people are often individuals with high school diplomas and hospital training but no formal college-education requirement.
[/quote]
In your experience so far, do these kinds of people generally handle the nudity they encounter maturely, or are there ever individuals who are inappropriate about it?

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Slappo' date='04 March 2010 - 06:11 PM' timestamp='1267747915' post='2066757']
I definitely don't like it.

When you are seeing a doctor, unless it is a medical emergency (as in ER room), you have a choice of which doctor's office you are going to visit or what doctor you will have for surgery (to an extent). It is also done for a medical treatment or scan necessary for your health and often chosen by you.

Call me a prude but I would be uncomfortable with my wife seeing a male gynecologist, and I would be uncomfortable getting shown how to check for testicular cancer by a female doctor.

Getting your clothes virtually removed at the airport is completely different from any sort of medical procedure. If this were posted on a ballot I would vote against it in a heart beat, terrorist or no terrorist.
[/quote]

I also don't like the scans, but I think they can be done professionally and legitimately. That said, I would prefer these be done by professionals and not Joe-Schmoes off the street with 2days of training. But as I mentioned in the response to Lil Red there are many times in the medical system where you do not have the choice to determine who is present during your 'exposed moments'. The reality is that when you are unconscious in the surgery, you have no idea who might be around witnessing the procedure...this is how learning occurs within the medical system. It is not voyeuristic, it is professional.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='04 March 2010 - 07:32 PM' timestamp='1267752737' post='2066786']
In your experience so far, do these kinds of people generally handle the nudity they encounter maturely, or are there ever individuals who are inappropriate about it?
[/quote]

People are generally mature and professional. It is their job to be so. I am sure there exists individuals who have been unprofessional, as in any line of work...but in my experience people are there to provide healthcare to the patient. I have myself witnessed surgeries and such while shadowing at hospitals. I am sure the patients had no idea I was going to be there and were never told I had been there. But the hospital is where patient need and medical education coincide.

[ardillacid]

Does your doctor see you naked?

[Veridicus]

[quote name='notardillacid' date='04 March 2010 - 07:41 PM' timestamp='1267753287' post='2066794']
Does your doctor see you naked?
[/quote]

Who are you asking?

[Ephrem Augustine]

I guess when I hear body scans, I am still afraid that some kind of computer will scan and save the scans to memory. That is the part that makes me most nervous.
If we could ensure that only a few qualified individuals have access to these scans, then that might put me at ease.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Ephrem Augustine' date='04 March 2010 - 07:51 PM' timestamp='1267753861' post='2066801']
I guess when I hear body scans, I am still afraid that some kind of computer will scan and save the scans to memory. That is the part that makes me most nervous.
If we could ensure that only a few qualified individuals have access to these scans, then that might put me at ease.
[/quote]

I agree with this sentiment. If they are going to scan, it should be done by people who have had some sort of professional training to do so and the images should be deleted frequently.

[cmotherofpirl]

The scanners are not connected to computers or printers, it is simply a viewing screen of the front and back of the body.

[Ed Normile]

I do not se where the bodily condition of the person scanned is really a consideration. If one were to truly beleive a pervert would be disappointed at viewing flabby peoples bodies all day they must assume to discount the persons who are actually attracted to heavy set partners. All this is really a moot point however, as we are not to place ourselves in the near occasion of sin and we are also called to be modest, this invasive scan negates any chance at that. I wonder how long it will take for these "scans" to start showing up on the web, along with the tanning bed and changing room videos that are being traded there.

ed

[Slappo]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='04 March 2010 - 04:31 PM' timestamp='1267749097' post='2066767']
There is nothing intrinsically evil with seeing a naked body or the naked form, even if it is not someone from your own family (spouse or children). In many cases it is imprudent though and can be a near occasion of sin (thus we aren't all running out to join nudist colonies). My wife has a hard core Catholic male OB-GYN who I have no qualms with her going to (most of our home school moms go to him). I also don't think the doctor is placing himself in a near occasion of sin for the doctor to do his job. I'm told by the nurses, doctors, and ambulance drivers I know that you simply get used to medically necessary nudity quickly on the job (just as you get used to blood and puke), just as a curator working in the Vatican art gallery might be used to seeing the nudity in art. [b]We cover ourselves because we do not want our bodies to be misused by those looking at it.[/b]
[/quote]

To the bolded: Exactly. Thank you for reminding me about that. It is something I often forget.
Scanners used by anonymous people takes away our ability to cover ourselves. Knowing our doctors and choosing who will see us allows us to remain modest. We can reveal ourselves to those whom we trust will use this revelation appropriately and respectfully. Scanners remove this.

I would have to have a lot of trust in the guy to have absolutely no hesitation in being comfortable with my future wife seeing a male OB-GYN. It could happen though, especially if we found a really solid Catholic one. I live in a small town of 33,000 with no roads in or out though so options are very limited. For emergency doctors, I have absolutely no qualms about whether it is a guy or a girl as long as they can help me or my family, but for those whom I have the option to choose, I would want people I can trust, and if there is no one I can trust, I would at least want someone of the same sex.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Slappo' date='05 March 2010 - 02:24 AM' timestamp='1267770249' post='2066958']
To the bolded: Exactly. Thank you for reminding me about that. It is something I often forget.
Scanners used by anonymous people takes away our ability to cover ourselves. Knowing our doctors and choosing who will see us allows us to remain modest. We can reveal ourselves to those whom we trust will use this revelation appropriately and respectfully. Scanners remove this.

I would have to have a lot of trust in the guy to have absolutely no hesitation in being comfortable with my future wife seeing a male OB-GYN. It could happen though, especially if we found a really solid Catholic one. I live in a small town of 33,000 with no roads in or out though so options are very limited. For emergency doctors, I have absolutely no qualms about whether it is a guy or a girl as long as they can help me or my family, but for those whom I have the option to choose, I would want people I can trust, and if there is no one I can trust, I would at least want someone of the same sex.
[/quote]
Scanners are not skin. Images on a screen are not a problem,its simply a detailed outline of your body, somebody wanting to see my actual body would be a definite issue.
And not to sound rude Slappo, but in the choice of OB-GYN its your wife's comfort not yours that matters so much, you need to trust her choice in the matter.

[Slappo]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='04 March 2010 - 10:40 PM' timestamp='1267771219' post='2066967']
And not to sound rude Slappo, but in the choice of OB-GYN its your wife's comfort not yours that matters so much, you need to trust her choice in the matter.
[/quote]

I didn't say I would prevent her from going to whomever she chose. I just might not be comfortable with it. It isn't a requirement of marriage that I be comfortable with everything my wife does or chooses to do.

This is also something her and I have already discussed but I didn't think I needed to get into that much detail.


Edit: Oh I see the unclarity in my original post. The bottom half of the original post "I would want people I can trust, and if there is no one I can trust, I would at least want someone of the same sex," was about doctors in general (even more specifically my own doctors), not specifically about my wife-to-be's OB-GYN.

Edited March 5, 2010 by Slappo

[Totus Tuus]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='04 March 2010 - 04:38 PM' timestamp='1267738729' post='2066687']
I see her point, however given a choice between a full body scan and a stripsearch, the scan is obviously less invasive and dignified. I think the notion of looking at overweight or obese shapes all day is not exactly appealing.
[/quote]

I guess it is the better of two evils, but the way I see it they are both evils. It's kind like the American principle, "innocent until proven guilty." An invasive search is punishment for someone who hasn't done anything wrong. I don't think we can justify it as a preventative measure. They need to be content with the oodles of other equipment they already have to check for bombs, weapons, etc. It seems like 99.9% of travelers are just trying to get somewhere with no violent motives. Why punish all of those on account of the treat of .01%? Drunk driving has killed far more people, and yet there's no government intrusion between any driver and his car.
Just my .02.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Totus Tuus' date='05 March 2010 - 11:54 AM' timestamp='1267790063' post='2067004']
I guess it is the better of two evils, but the way I see it they are both evils. It's kind like the American principle, "innocent until proven guilty." An invasive search is punishment for someone who hasn't done anything wrong. I don't think we can justify it as a preventative measure. They need to be content with the oodles of other equipment they already have to check for bombs, weapons, etc. It seems like 99.9% of travelers are just trying to get somewhere with no violent motives. Why punish all of those on account of the treat of .01%? Drunk driving has killed far more people, and yet there's no government intrusion between any driver and his car.
Just my .02.
[/quote]
I agree