the voice is but a small part of communication, and doctors can read facial expressions better than most. It tells far more than a few words. So, I do see the point in her removing a veil although his defense does seem a bit confrontational.

His action was to suggest she remove her face veil, because he thought it would help communication. She had the choice to say yes or no. I don't see the crime in a suggestion.

Of course you don't. I'm simply pointing out your "thought crime" doesn't apply whether you side with the doctor or not.

All I will say is that it seems more than simply asking her to speak with her mouth free of the veil given the comments quoted in the article.

At best he has terrible people skills for someone in such a position.

But I was replying to Toy Soldiers suggestion of the Doctor being forced to attend a course.

He genuinely may not have been able to hear though. :shrug:

Idk, I feel like it would be so easy for her to play the race card in a situation like this rather than her being actually offended by it.

A doctor being forced by his employer to attend a course in how better to handle people in his.... people focussed job doesn't really have anything to do with "thought crimes" either?

OK

I'm not bothered anymore.

tbh while I'm on the doctor's side in this one, this ain't really an example of thought crimes.

If he'd have refused to speak with her at all while her face was covered, then maybe he should have been disciplined. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

...I can’t really say I would have ‘a side’ with this because It would be impossible to know whether the doctor was justified in asking her to remove her face veil...whether he was actually being prohibited from fully hearing her voice specifically because of the covering...I find it worrying that around 100,000 signatures of people who it would also be impossible for them to know, would be put to a petition ...


Dr Paul Scott, chairman of North Staffordshire Local Medical Committee, said: “It’s a conflict between religious sensitivity and communication. Each is valid and it’s very hard [to make a judgement] unless you were there.


...and yet a judgement has being formed by the signing of a petition... and I have to wonder if such a judgement would have been formed in the same way by so many voices of people who couldn’t possibly know whether the veil was hindering his hearing or not ...if this wasn’t something which involved a Muslim religious garment...



...as is sadly often the way, the comments at the end of many newspaper articles on this story..are disgusting...

If a woman couldn’t hear someone because of her hair she would put it behind her ear...if a Doctor could not understand what the woman was saying because she had a veil covering her mouth what is so wrong in asking her to lift it?...and if the woman wanted the Doctor to help her child...what’s more important? Lifting her veil to help him understand...or not lifting her veil and not helping her child?

If you take it at face value (ha). Judging by the quotes, it clearly was not.

Do Muslim female doctors treat patients whilst wearing a veil ? I want to see who i am speaking to.

..the lady wasn’t the patient so I think the thing with this is...was her face veil prohibiting the doctor from hearing her clearly when she was speaking about her child...was he completely justified in asking for it to be removed..?...and so the investigation...without witnesses which I presume there wasn’t, it’s a very difficult one tbh...

I'd say the same if it weren't for his follow-up comments;

"the same way I’d ask a motorcyclist to remove a crash helmet."

"I'm a little bit sad the country has been committed to depths such as this."

"it takes more than this to knock me off my perch."

For me it adds up to a much clearer picture to be honest.

He is unable to work while under investigation as he is a freelancer and his agency won't send him out

Difficult one to judge, on the one hand she is in his private office and with her husband and child and he may have had difficulty understanding how she was describing the childs symptoms and thought removing her veil might help him and her communicate better, why couldn't the husband have explained? was he in the room as he is the one who complained? so I'm thinking English may be a second language, on the other hand he might be a power mad pompous ass ...who knows.....its all a bit too vague, so I won't be signing the petition

...yeah I don’t disagree with you either on the comments that were made, TS...but basing my judgement on those is ..(..to me..)...similar to those who have signed the petition and are giving the doctor their full backing, not knowing anything other than ‘he said’, type thing and an opposite side of a similarish coin..?...if that makes sense...

...I do have to wonder as I said earlier...if the issue hadn’t involved a Muslim garment...would a petition have gained so many signatures so quickly...?...hmmmmm....

That question can work both ways. If the issue hadn't involved a muslim garment, would he be going through this pointless investigation?

...but that’s the whole point ...none of us know what transpired in the hospital room...hence an investigation taking place...?...and yet all ‘support’ is with the doctor in that there is no petition defending her right to wear her cultural and religious attire...:laugh:...the support through a petition is most definitely not two ways...

"none of us know what transpired in the hospital room"

and how will an "investigation" help?

It mystifies me that Muslims who insist on women covering their face in a country where women have fought for freedom, would want to live here at all.

Doctors should be able to refuse to treat people rather than risk their career being marred by an investigation.

He was well within his rights !! Time they were banned in the Uk

:umm2:

Do you know that Muslim men in Whitechapel have a history of telling white women that they are inappropriately dressed in a country where women's rights have been hard fought for? No one's bothered if women want to wear other articles of faith, headscarf, for example, but women being required to cover themselves belongs waaay back in the dark ages.

Oh yeah I get that, but do we really think that’s the reason why Chuff wants them banned?