The Supreme Court has ruled against a law banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ kids in Colorado, one of about two dozen states that banned the discredited practice.
i would imagine the state professional org could strip licensing based on their own professional requirements, in the way that any medical doctor could lose their license to practice by being a dangerous quack.
but that only goes so far, as cranks can still go to quacks and quacks can still treat them as long as they disclose their lack of licensure and avoid claiming associated clinical terminology. or being caught “practicing medicine”, so to speak.
ive also heard that state licensing boards can be cowardly about booting out member groups out, like we’ve seen with some shithead doctors in Texas being antivax and not being obliterated from the roles.
apparently, these professional associations are not a great way to protect the public. rather, they are kind of a last ditch to protect the members and their reputations from a lone, dangerous quack and not a way to stop a form of treatment some amount of members have bought into.
that’s my analysis anyway. public health seems in complete contradiction to capitalism, so the courts seem predisposed to protect dangerous cranks, evil charlatans, and snake oil sellers if they have a lot of capital in their corner, backing their bullshit.
Right, the US government is also not a great way to protect the public as we see here so I’m kind of grasping at options. I think it would be easier for activists to focus on the professional orgs than the government directly, but as you said, the concept of public health is not particularly compatible with capitalism at the core.
i would imagine the state professional org could strip licensing based on their own professional requirements, in the way that any medical doctor could lose their license to practice by being a dangerous quack.
but that only goes so far, as cranks can still go to quacks and quacks can still treat them as long as they disclose their lack of licensure and avoid claiming associated clinical terminology. or being caught “practicing medicine”, so to speak.
ive also heard that state licensing boards can be cowardly about booting out member groups out, like we’ve seen with some shithead doctors in Texas being antivax and not being obliterated from the roles.
apparently, these professional associations are not a great way to protect the public. rather, they are kind of a last ditch to protect the members and their reputations from a lone, dangerous quack and not a way to stop a form of treatment some amount of members have bought into.
that’s my analysis anyway. public health seems in complete contradiction to capitalism, so the courts seem predisposed to protect dangerous cranks, evil charlatans, and snake oil sellers if they have a lot of capital in their corner, backing their bullshit.
Right, the US government is also not a great way to protect the public as we see here so I’m kind of grasping at options. I think it would be easier for activists to focus on the professional orgs than the government directly, but as you said, the concept of public health is not particularly compatible with capitalism at the core.
professional associations protect the prestige of the profession
sometimes i say a lot of words when like 9 will do it.