![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 22 of 22. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 11:27:19
I asked Dr. Bob to go to Restaurant Gary Danko with me for Monday May 18. Pdoc says it is not ethical for Dr. Bob to go with me. Why?
I don't understand. It is not like Dr. Bob is my pdoc. Why would it be unethical?
Someone please explain.
I understand the being unbiased part, since he is administrator, but why unethical??
Posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 11:58:24
In reply to Not ethical for Dr. Bob, posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 11:27:19
What are ethics to you, Deneb? Or maybe if that's way too broad - what might Dr Bob's be in relation to Babblers when he meets them in person?
I think of them as a set of moral principles that guide a person's choices, behavior, etc. I also see my own ethics as an *obligation* I have to myself and to others in any given situation.
Maybe his desire to make sure he wouldn't even appear biased IS part of his ethics in relation to Babblers? Could be.
Only Dr. Bob can explain with 100% certainty - and maybe he doesn't even have that! Ethical choices are a series of lifelong judgment calls that aren't always clear, easy or fun.
It's a good question. Did you ask your pdoc to breakdown what she meant by unethical in this case?
Posted by Phillipa on April 21, 2009, at 13:08:03
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » Deneb, posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 11:58:24
Just guessing could it be that it would be considered dating and I believe dating ones therapist or pdoc is unethical while in treatment. Hummm he's not your pdoc? Phillipa
Posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 13:19:58
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » 10derHeart, posted by Phillipa on April 21, 2009, at 13:08:03
I wasn't thinking along those lines, myself.
Is eating dinner with someone always, or automatically, a date? (gosh, I may be in trouble..... ;-) )
However....it is a thought. Many married folks in my group of friends/acquaintances will stay away from one-on-one socializing with the opposite sex, due to their personal and professional ethics. It isn't a trust thing, or anything like that, it's more a reality of life - and fairly pragmatic - as someone here likes to say. The very nature of people is to sometimes see a thing and jump to conclusions, or at least wonder, and then possibly gossip. I am acquainted with military chaplains and other people in various leadership positions in various organizations. They just aren't going to take the risk.... Also, some just don't think it's appropriate, as yes, it can *look* like a date, no matter the "truth." A personal choice.
Anyway....all that wouldn't necessarily have a thing to do with Dr. Bob. I don't recall his marital status ever being something he's discussed here. Maybe so, but I don't remember. I'm just thinking out loud based on Deneb's wondering and your post, too...
It is a good and interesting question.
Posted by Dinah on April 21, 2009, at 13:48:44
In reply to Not ethical for Dr. Bob, posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 11:27:19
I have found that Dr. Bob's position can frequently evoke transferential reactions. Including from me. Your pdoc is definitely aware of how you feel about Dr. Bob, and that a dinner with Dr. Bob, tete a tete, would be unlikely to *just* be a dinner with Dr. Bob to you. It would possibly assume far more importance than that. And if she is aware about your fears over your reaction to Dr. Bob and/or other Babblers, she would be even more adamant I'm sure.
I imagine that Dr. Bob is not unaware of the possibility of transference, and likely feels a similar sense of responsibility that he feels in his profession.
That's just a guess. But I must confess I too think it would be an ethical stance not to even give the appearance of taking advantage of transference.
Of course, this is also Dr. Bob's professional conference and he will likely be very occupied with friends and colleagues. I've always thought it wasn't really an ideal time for those Babble get-togethers, other than that it moves around.
Posted by SLS on April 21, 2009, at 14:57:12
In reply to Not ethical for Dr. Bob, posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 11:27:19
I think ethics are more of a professional or personal rule book to govern behavior so as to help insure morality and conflicts of interest. It is not morality itself. In some cases, it might be immoral to remain ethical.
Very often, professional ethics exist to protect others from the profession. Dinah did a good job of explaining how this might apply in your case.
Bob is unlikely to suffer personal harm for having dinner with just about anyone. However, his ethics of conduct and oath as a medical doctor - first, do no harm - could be breached by having an interaction with someone whom he knows to have emotional vulnerabilities. This is especially true of a professional who is conducting a harmful act that relates to their own field of practice.
Because there are so many shades of gray between having dinner with a psychiatrist and having a psychiatric condition exacerbated by a psychiatrist, Dr. Bob seems to have decided to place a professional boundary between himself and members of the Psycho-Babble community so as to insure no injurious relationships develop between himself and others.
I'm not sure how much of the above statements are actually involved in Dr. Bob's reasoning in displaying boundaries. Maybe none of them. I have some reservations about trying to read the good doctor's mind. I don't seem to be much good at it.
:-)
- Scott
> I have found that Dr. Bob's position can frequently evoke transferential reactions. Including from me. Your pdoc is definitely aware of how you feel about Dr. Bob, and that a dinner with Dr. Bob, tete a tete, would be unlikely to *just* be a dinner with Dr. Bob to you. It would possibly assume far more importance than that. And if she is aware about your fears over your reaction to Dr. Bob and/or other Babblers, she would be even more adamant I'm sure.
>
> I imagine that Dr. Bob is not unaware of the possibility of transference, and likely feels a similar sense of responsibility that he feels in his profession.
>
> That's just a guess. But I must confess I too think it would be an ethical stance not to even give the appearance of taking advantage of transference.
>
> Of course, this is also Dr. Bob's professional conference and he will likely be very occupied with friends and colleagues. I've always thought it wasn't really an ideal time for those Babble get-togethers, other than that it moves around.
>
Posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 15:28:38
In reply to Not ethical for Dr. Bob, posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 11:27:19
One way to sum up what Dinah and Scott have said is that Dr. Bob may choose the absolute, safest path in order to not even take a chance at hurting or harming you emotionally. An abundance of caution?
Isn't that kind of a comforting thought?
It is to me.
Posted by SLS on April 21, 2009, at 15:34:05
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob, posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 15:28:38
> One way to sum up what Dinah and Scott have said
Great summary!
And I thought *I* was succinct.
:-)
> is that Dr. Bob may choose the absolute, safest path in order to not even take a chance at hurting or harming you emotionally. An abundance of caution?
>
> Isn't that kind of a comforting thought?
>
> It is to me.
Me too.
- Scott
Posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 16:14:05
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » 10derHeart, posted by SLS on April 21, 2009, at 15:34:05
Thanks!
Honestly, no one has ever accused me of being succinct before! Quite the opposite. Just ask my patient, long-suffering fellow deputies ;-)
Maybe I've learned from some Babblers, like, oh I don't know.....You!!
Posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 21:51:08
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » Deneb, posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 11:58:24
> What are ethics to you, Deneb? Or maybe if that's way too broad - what might Dr Bob's be in relation to Babblers when he meets them in person?
I am not sure. I guess the not wanting to appear biased thing makes sense. But didn't Dr. Bob have dinner with another Babbler alone?
> It's a good question. Did you ask your pdoc to breakdown what she meant by unethical in this case?
I think she tried to, but I didn't understand. She said something about his needing to be professional.
>
Posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 21:57:29
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » Phillipa, posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 13:19:58
> I wasn't thinking along those lines, myself.
>
> Is eating dinner with someone always, or automatically, a date? (gosh, I may be in trouble..... ;-) )
>
> However....it is a thought. Many married folks in my group of friends/acquaintances will stay away from one-on-one socializing with the opposite sex, due to their personal and professional ethics. It isn't a trust thing, or anything like that, it's more a reality of life - and fairly pragmatic - as someone here likes to say. The very nature of people is to sometimes see a thing and jump to conclusions, or at least wonder, and then possibly gossip. I am acquainted with military chaplains and other people in various leadership positions in various organizations. They just aren't going to take the risk.... Also, some just don't think it's appropriate, as yes, it can *look* like a date, no matter the "truth." A personal choice.That makes sense, but didn't Dr. Bob go out with another Babbler alone? I wouldn't think of dinner with Dr. Bob as a date, but I guess it could look that way to other people. Maybe Dr. Bob doesn't want to risk having his pdoc friends seeing him eating dinner with me. I am not attracted to Dr. Bob romantically.
>
> Anyway....all that wouldn't necessarily have a thing to do with Dr. Bob. I don't recall his marital status ever being something he's discussed here. Maybe so, but I don't remember. I'm just thinking out loud based on Deneb's wondering and your post, too...
>
> It is a good and interesting question.Dr. Bob is married. It says that on Facebook.
Posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 22:01:48
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on April 21, 2009, at 13:48:44
> I have found that Dr. Bob's position can frequently evoke transferential reactions. Including from me. Your pdoc is definitely aware of how you feel about Dr. Bob, and that a dinner with Dr. Bob, tete a tete, would be unlikely to *just* be a dinner with Dr. Bob to you. It would possibly assume far more importance than that. And if she is aware about your fears over your reaction to Dr. Bob and/or other Babblers, she would be even more adamant I'm sure.
>
> I imagine that Dr. Bob is not unaware of the possibility of transference, and likely feels a similar sense of responsibility that he feels in his profession.I don't understand. What responsibility?
>
> That's just a guess. But I must confess I too think it would be an ethical stance not to even give the appearance of taking advantage of transference.How would going out to dinner be taking advantage of transference?
>
> Of course, this is also Dr. Bob's professional conference and he will likely be very occupied with friends and colleagues. I've always thought it wasn't really an ideal time for those Babble get-togethers, other than that it moves around.
>Yeah, I wondered about that. He might just be busy.
Posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 22:06:57
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » Deneb, posted by SLS on April 21, 2009, at 14:57:12
> Bob is unlikely to suffer personal harm for having dinner with just about anyone. However, his ethics of conduct and oath as a medical doctor - first, do no harm - could be breached by having an interaction with someone whom he knows to have emotional vulnerabilities. This is especially true of a professional who is conducting a harmful act that relates to their own field of practice.
Does Dr. Bob have to always 24/7 do no harm? How would he be harming me by going out to dinner?
Posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 22:13:15
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob, posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 15:28:38
> One way to sum up what Dinah and Scott have said is that Dr. Bob may choose the absolute, safest path in order to not even take a chance at hurting or harming you emotionally. An abundance of caution?
>
> Isn't that kind of a comforting thought?
>
> It is to me.That is a nice thought, I hope it is true and he doesn't ignore me to hurt me.
Posted by garnet71 on April 22, 2009, at 1:00:03
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob, posted by 10derHeart on April 21, 2009, at 15:28:38
10derheart,
Now wouldn't it be more professional for Dr. Bob to at least acknowledge all these posts - and explain to Deneb himself why he can't go to dinner with her or have any type of relationship with her, rather than have her guessing, wondering, worrying, asking, pleading needlessly?
I'm not being judgemental here. Maybe he's already done so. But why does Deneb keep having to ask over and over again about why Dr. Bob does not acknowledge her? Couldn't he at least inject one simple reply or comment to explain his distance? It seems cruel to not do so, and for everyone to try to 'guess' his thoughts. I mean, wouldn't one comment from him-one simple explanation-be able to give Deneb the understanding she persistently seeks? (just asking!!)
Posted by 10derHeart on April 22, 2009, at 1:49:05
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » 10derHeart, posted by garnet71 on April 22, 2009, at 1:00:03
Babblers going to San Francisco have their own Yahoo Group set up so they can discuss the details of the trip.
She can ask him there, and I think probably has. I would guess his time to post there is about as limited as it is to post here. But I am only guessing, speculating, as you have expressed.
I'm sure it would be great if Dr Bob answered every post, every thread that posters address to him on these boards about everything. But history has shown that to be an unrealistic expectation, IMO. He just doesn't, and I can't speak for him about his choices regarding that, obviously.
I think posters on this thread were just trying to 1) respond so she would have responses and 2) give Deneb some insight as to why a pdoc/person/man/adminstrator - whatever might not accept such an invitation. Or more even, what her own pdoc meant, as Deneb has said she didn't understand the professional ethics response she did get... That's all I was trying to do. Knowing Dr. Bob, even if he did respond, he might not be back to elaborate for a while, or at all. It's his way. {shrug} So perhaps I myself was making a preemptive strike, based on my acceptance of the reality of Dr. Bob's habits here, in hopes of helping Deneb, even a little.
>I mean, wouldn't one comment from him-one simple explanation-be able to give Deneb the understanding she persistently seeks?
I don't know. Possibly. But possibly not. Maybe Deneb can answer? Or maybe she wouldn't know till she heard Dr.Bob's answer...
Hope I don't sound defensive. Don't mean to - it's just, well, honestly, only Dr. Bob and Deneb can really respond to the questions you've posed in your post. Whether it's professional or not, how Dr. Bob interacts on Babble (or doesn't) I guess has been discussed at great length over the years on Admin, and is open to interpretation.
Posted by SLS on April 22, 2009, at 10:55:25
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » SLS, posted by Deneb on April 21, 2009, at 22:06:57
> > Bob is unlikely to suffer personal harm for having dinner with just about anyone. However, his ethics of conduct and oath as a medical doctor - first, do no harm - could be breached by having an interaction with someone whom he knows to have emotional vulnerabilities. This is especially true of a professional who is conducting a harmful act that relates to their own field of practice.
>
> Does Dr. Bob have to always 24/7 do no harm?Of course. Injuries can happen 24/7.
> How would he be harming me by going out to dinner?
How would it be harming you by NOT going out to dinner with Dr. Bob?
I think there will lie your answer.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on April 22, 2009, at 11:16:09
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » Deneb, posted by SLS on April 22, 2009, at 10:55:25
> ...by having an interaction with someone whom he knows to have emotional vulnerabilities.
Dr. Bob really knows very little about us as individual minds. He really can't be certain of anything when it comes to each of our unique psyches. He really can't know how his behaviors will affect anyone. So, it would be foolish of the doctor to develop a personal relationship with anyone here. Even people who appear well adjusted on the Internet can be less so in real life.
Why should Dr. Bob place himself in a situation that could be injurious to his own professional stature? The protective nature of there being boundaries between the doctor and the members of the Psycho-Babble community works both ways.
Just as it is true of the doctor, so too is it true of me that I can't be certain of how anyone else thinks. I don't really know that you or anyone else would be emotionally vulnerable in any particular situation. You might not be vulnerable to any harm at all were you to have an intimate dinner with Dr. Bob. I really don't know...
Neither does Dr. Bob.
- Scott
Posted by Tabitha on April 24, 2009, at 12:44:57
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » 10derHeart, posted by garnet71 on April 22, 2009, at 1:00:03
I don't think one more reply from Dr. Bob would give Deneb the understanding she seeks. She has told us repeatedly how she feels when she gets a reply from Dr. Bob. She's happy, then it fades and she needs another reply.
He may be doing her a favor by not feeding the cycle with another reply.
Posted by garnet71 on April 24, 2009, at 15:00:59
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » garnet71, posted by Tabitha on April 24, 2009, at 12:44:57
I know what you are saying, but I wasn't referring to an general reply--just an answer to this particular question. Answering the question surely wouldn't result in asking the same question over and over again, would it? This same question has been repeatedly asked on various boards in this forum.
Posted by Tabitha on April 25, 2009, at 11:45:03
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » Tabitha, posted by garnet71 on April 24, 2009, at 15:00:59
Posted by Deneb on April 25, 2009, at 23:16:34
In reply to Re: Not ethical for Dr. Bob » Tabitha, posted by garnet71 on April 24, 2009, at 15:00:59
He explained why he couldn't, doesn't have to do with ethics at all. :-)
Dr. Bob was not ignoring me, he was just busy.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.