[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

News Watch Home

Legitimacy of health professional service withdrawal questioned  

Credit:  The Manitoulin Expositor | www.manitoulin.ca ~~

The Anglins (‘Enormous credit due to principled dentist,’ June 5, page 4) and Mr. Best (‘Dentist’s stand is a matter of principle,’ May 29, page 4) mention a “principle” informing a dentist’s withdrawal of service from supporters of wind farms.

Here’s the question that I hope they haven’t asked themselves in preparation for their letters: Is it justified to deny dental or health care to someone? I would find it unlikely that these writers would answer “yes,” as a matter of principle.

A dentist has the sole right to perform commonplace (as well as unusual) highly skilled procedures. One cannot open a tooth-drawing storefront as we see in Guatemala and the East, where very poor people obtain some relief.

The doctor (and nurse/practitioner) has the sole right to prescribe restricted medicines, to admit to hospital, to use or direct to be used the sophisticated machinery of modern medicine and to share with the suffering her experience and knowledge and skill.

A dentist or a doctor who refuses treatment to a smoker or a fat person or a wind turbine supporter is saying, “You are not worth treating.” Granting this right of selection to one dentist or one doctor grants this right to all dentists and doctors. Health care is effectively no longer a human right in our country if we accept these dentist/doctor boycotts, whether we have socialized medicine or user-pay medicine.

Are there those among us who are so far-gone that we are banished from health-care? Is there a principle to be discovered here? Pray, Mr. Best or the Anglins, enlighten me.

Revenge is a childish motive and not to be suspected of this dentist. Terror, on the other hand, is the deterrence theory whereby one punishes, not for justice, but really to send a message to other communities of what could await anyone who supports wind turbines. Although not imagining this dentist capable of this kind of “terror” I fear other people in other communities considering wind power may face behaviour modeled on the template of this dentist. I can only describe Dr. Studzienny’s actions as ill-conceived, misdirected and exceedingly damaging, but well-intentioned as he conceives of good with regard to wind farms.

Phil Dabous
Little Current

Source:  The Manitoulin Expositor | www.manitoulin.ca

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.



Wind Watch on Facebook

Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

National Wind Watch