 |
|
Dialogues@RU is published annually
by the
Writing Program at
Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey
Volume One
Spring 2002
Removing
Cultural Stereotypes to Find Real Differences
Between Doctors and Nurses -
Page 3
by Jon Laor
Martin's use of these examples is a tool to show a general trend that although the biological facts do not support these descriptions, they are used anyway in scientific literature; this is followed by the "reimportation" of these misconceptions into social discourse. The use of the word "reimportation" speaks against the illogic of the situation. "The firm basis" she speaks of is the hard to shake bias and prejudice that affect our society. Obviously, Martin does not agree that you should use examples from nature to justify social situations, especially when these examples have been skewed by scientific myths. The myths that connect nursing to the idea of feminine subservience, as Smoyak does (Smoyak 78), are parallel to the myths Martin opposes in her essay.
In order to justifiably argue that gender dominance, despite Smoyak's assertions, is not the core difference between the two professions, it must be shown that females can contribute to the physician profession while males can contribute to the nursing profession despite the overt biased exhibited towards them. How these out of place professionals deal with their coworkers' attitudes in terms of gender stereotype, shows what possibilities the profession has for them and what they can contribute. While there is no doubt that male and female entrants into the socially "wrong" profession face prejudiced reactions, many persevere and adapt in ways that the opposite sex would not. This shows that there are fundamental differences in ideology between the two professions but that the dominance of certain genders does not need to be the defining line between the two. The way female doctors are treated by their co-workers certainly adds stress and changes their way of working. The preferential treatment for male doctors influences the outlook of all medical personnel on the matter. Much of Persuad's article is based on the findings of a scholarly Norwegian survey. One of its findings is that "sixty per cent of female doctors in the Norwegian survey - as opposed to only eight per cent of their male colleagues - thought female doctors asked for less assistance than male counterparts" (Persuad). This is only an example of the types of strategies that female doctors must often use to function in the social environment of their work place. Since male doctors receive better treatment from nurses, female doctors must use the following strategies to cope: Making friends with nurses or helping them with personal problems, relying less on nurses by becoming more independent of them, and becoming more respectful of nurses by cleaning up after procedures the way men tend not to, being efficient in doing what nurses ask of them, and asking the advice and following the suggestion of nurses (Persuad). The obvious result of this trend is an increased level of respect between the two professions, a decreased level of chauvinism and air of superiority by physicians, and a better level of cooperation that, through increased two-way communication, allows the sharing of ideas and a growth from collaboration. As shown, by challenging social conventions and becoming physicians, women can help shatter the "sleeping metaphors" put together by writers like Smoyak, that doctors must be patriarchs, and consequently change the face of doctor-nurse relations for the better.
While the relationships of female doctors should be studied, so then, should the situation of male nurses. Throughout most of the essay, Willis, by concentrating on male nurses, addresses the many faulty theories on gender and nursing. She explains the problems with literature on men in nursing as follows.
The literature on men in nursing tends towards a biological essentialism whereby all men are constructed as dominating at the expense of leaving the domestic private, intimate and dirty work to women (Ryan and Porter, 1993). Such a construction over-looks the reality of the workplace, particularly the recent decline in opportunities for men to achieve promotions away from the bed-side. (Willis 301)