In a message dated 8/26/99 9:53:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

>
>  Nor does it mean he is not. The post I objected to abusively called him
>  MISTER, without offering the slightest proof that he had not earned the
>  degrees he claims to have earned. If you, also, are going to doubt his
>  credentials in public, it behooves you to check with the institutions he
>  attended, and PROVE that he didn't earn the right to be called Doctor.

I'm sorry that this thread continues..but there's a bigger issue here than
the doctor's credentials.

I (nor anyone here) should have to look up a person's credentials when
reading a statement by someone crediting him/herself as a doctor.
It is my belief that the information they present should speak for itself.

If someone says something meaningful and intelligent I don't give a rat's
patoot if they have a doctorate or not.  I do NOT follow people based on
their CREDENTIALS...I listen to the W O R D S. His words had the
potential to do harm.  This is a violation of the hypocratic oath among
other moral rules of conduct.

People in positions of power (Doctors, Lawyers, Police Officers, Judges, etc)
are given extra credibility in most cultures...people follow them..for this
reason they have an added responsibility to be particularly careful about
what they say and do.  It goes with the program.  They can NOT have
their cake and eat it too...if they can't handle the responsibility, they need
to step down, let the perks go to someone that deserves them.

Am I being too idealistic here?


Anna 8-)