Nurse during gynecologic examination

Any time my wife goes for an exam, it's only her and the doctor. I've asked about having someone else in with her, and she always says she doesn't need anyone with her.

A female nurse/chaperone is always present if a male doctor. Covering both parties in being there

Had a genital exam yesterday at a sexual health clinic and it was a female nurse and female student. I then had cervical screening with another nurse while I was there and it was just her in the room.

I have a male gynecologist and he rarely has his nurse present. I'm sure I could request it but it's not really necessary. I trust him fully and he has proven to be a great doctor after other obgyns failed me in the past. Even when I was younger I had a male gynecologist and it was never an issue

Ive had exams with male and female doctors without the chaperone present and I find that more comfortable personally. I’ve also had exams with both gender doctors with a chaperone present. I think It depends on the clinic/hospitals policy. I’ve never been asked my preference.

We always ensure that there are several people present. For women who do not want a male doctor, we always provide a female doctor, without discussion. However, there are always two female assistants present; the man is never alone with the woman. This is for the protection of both the patient and the doctor.

NO, it is NOT. There is one and ONLY one reason for a chaperone - who always happens to be on the payroll of the medical provider. This is ONLY for testifying against the patient in case of any lawsuit or charges of unprofessional conduct. Ever wondered why the patient's family member or a random person from the parking lot is not admitted as a chaperone? Because they do not have confidence that the testimony would favor them. And its not that there is a certification required to be a chaperone.

Regarding the protection of the patient - what does that tell you about the doctor if the patient requires protection from them ? Are they sexual predators ? If not, why do the patients need protection from them ?

Always a nurse with male gyno.

Although. About 10 years ago I had intermittent exams with a surgeon because I could feel things in my boobs. He wanted me. He was flirting from the get go. He usually didn’t have a nurse with him. One time I was holding a drape in my lap and he dragged a finger down my naked back before he left the room.

The feminist in me should be angry about that. Oh, to be in my 30s again….

In California, where i practiced for 25 years, you would be stupid not to have a chaperone. I always did for pelvic exams tho, as has been pointed out, that required me to use my nurse and she had other things to do. Generally, my preference was to suggest to women needing a routine pelvic exam, that they see their gynecologist (I'm an internist). If the problem was abdominal or pelvic pain, I would of course get my nurse and do a pelvic. Interestingly, the place I spent 4 years where they did not use chaperone was in medical school. They pointed out that the clinics were overscheduled and understaffed. Of course we often had staff physicians in with us to teach or come in if we had questions.

As a paramedic I have a partner up front driving but I am alone in the back both female and male patients.

In my experience here in Sydney, Australia, I’ve never had a chaperone during any gynecological or colorectal exams. I’ve always been alone with the doctor (male or female), and honestly, I’ve never had a single bad experience. My doctors have all been complete professionals and I like to think I’ve been a very well-behaved patient too 😉

It is sad that we live in a world where chaperones are often necessary these days. I completely understand why, some people have had truly awful experiences and others are very litigious, but it does feel like a real shame that trust has eroded so much.

I’ve been very lucky with my doctors and I’m grateful for that.

I'm sorry if this veers to far off topic but it made me think of a related point that shows how circular the rules can get on such things.

I'm not that current on various state codes here in the US, but this is for the most part a policy of the practice or driven by availability of staff. It may still be the law in Georgia requiring a chaperone for intimate female examinations but I don't recall any others, though I certainly may be mistaken about that.

Ohio used to have and probably still does have somewhere in code, that failure to offer a chaperone might constitute an impropriety. Nothing wrong with that, but there are many thousands of single physician practices where staffing simply does not exist. There were many other stipulations written into that same code that made sense on paper, but what I always found awkward for everyone involved was the rule of asking a patient whether or not she consented to having her husband, friend, whomever 3rd party in the room during her exam. The problem was that the language implied in a conflicting manner that any 3rd party was a "chaperone" and required consent to be present. So a physician could not simply bring a chaperone into exam room without consent, but technically, that makes the husband or friend who walks in to the exam room a "chaperone" by definition, and keep in mind she already brought this person in with her. Now logic dictates that there is validity in such verification for consent if the intimate exam was not necessarily expected. But in a gynecological setting, and as a female bringing your husband or 3rd party "chaperone" into the room, it's rather implied that you want him or her there, and yet, technically, you need consent.

I will say I never asked this question and I got the sense that most doctors did not bring it up either. I've heard from some who did follow this rule, or followed it loosely, that they were not comfortable with it. Most of the time they got an awkward smile that yes of course my husband or friend can be here, or a puzzled look and non answer, and that many patients were rather annoyed. I won't say that I was right or wrong, but I always thought that any patient who did not want someone in the room with them would either not bring them in the first place, or ask if there was a place for the 3rd party to go if they wanted them in the room initially but not for the actual exam. No need to make things adversarial but I know it does occur.

Sarahgyn ... I really like your Alice in Wonderland view of things. I've always thought the whole chaperone thing was at best random and annoying, though certainly if it makes a female patient feel more secure ...then great.... But in reality I think it's worth noting that in many instances where a doctor was in fact convicted of a sexual imposition of some sort, a chaperone was already present. ... and now that brings up another point to think about.

So you can find a ton of cases of a conviction or disciplinary action being imposed on doctor xy or z. Some info specifies that the doctor was alone, some that a chaperone was present, some case info does not infer one way or another. But what I find terribly sparse are convictions or disciplinary actions brought about as a result of having a chaperone in the room. In other words, and I think I saw it mentioned earlier, you can't assume the chaperone is there to protect the patient, but rather the doctor. Maybe those cases exist, but I'm not finding any offhand where a chaperone intervened mid exam to stop a doctor from taking advantage of a patient. What I am finding is a lot of instances where a doctor was disciplined or convicted, and the staff surrounding him knew something was wrong and said nothing.

just something to think about

On a funny note, whenever a doctor asks my wife if it's "ok" for me to be in the room during an exam she has this very exaggerated response - she'll say some version of..."oh gosh wait!....what?!! ... you mean someone followed me in here!! ... oh....wait....oh I recognize him now ...that's just my husband....he's very insecure being alone....

she has a much nastier response to the secretly whispered "are you safe at home" or "do you have firearms in your home" comments...

In France most of time you are alone with the gyno. Male or female it doesn't change anything

In most of the western world, a chaperone nurse/assistant must be present. It's for the protection of the doctor in case there are any accusations of misconduct. Additionally, they can assist the doctor in performing the exam.

In this new age of electronics, is not a video tape of a male examining a female just as good (and far cheaper) than a nurse/chaperon. In case of an accusation (there are a LOT more flaky female patients than weird doctors) then everyone in the courtroom can be a witness, with no accusations of favoritism.

In this new age of electronics, is not a video tape of a male examining a female just as good (and far cheaper) than a nurse/chaperon. In case of an accusation (there are a LOT more flaky female patients than weird doctors) then everyone in the courtroom can be a witness, with no accusations of favoritism.

Well, that opens a can (or should I say barrel) of worms.

First, there are country (and additionally in the case of US state specific) laws on where cameras are allowed. Any place where you have reasonable expectation that people are going to be in some state of undress - you legally cannot install any cameras. Think airbnb bedrooms or bathrooms and so on.

Second, you need consent from all parties to be agreed to be recorded since this is not a public space like an open park. Even in public spaces, if you record people's faces, depending on jurisdictions, you need consent. And in some places, if the video is recorded without explicit provable consent, it is inadmissible in a court of law regardless of the fact that it can change the decision.

Third, there is zero incentive for hospitals and doctors to go this way. More so hospitals than doctors. Sure, some frivolous patient lawsuits can be dismissed but the issue is not women alone. Doctors in a lot of cases are very culpable and if this comes, you can bet that they would not be in favor of this. But the real deal is the hospitals - they have to be able to store and safeguard videos. Very sensitive ones at that. No easy task and if there is one hack where these videos are exposed to the internet, you can bet that the company that owns the hospital is bankrupt (at least in the US). Why take that risk for zero gain ?

That said, AI transcribers could be used to generate the transcript in real time and store them from the conversations that happen in the exam room. That, in itself, will cut down a lot of abuse since everything you say can and will be used against you. A doctor forcing a procedure against a patient who is shreiking in pain cannot claim innocence. However, the uptake of this has been sketchy to say the least and there is severe resistance to change (at least in the medical communities that I am connected to).

Technology can definitely be used to make things simpler but putting the framework and guardrails around so that it is not misused depends on elected lawmakers who, as we all know, are technology averse, no matter where you are.

Everytime I’ve witnessed or heard about a real exam there was always a nurse present, be it male or female doc. Even the two times a student doc was present, the nurse was still present.

I’ve been asked if I needed to be accompanied before during an examination.

When I was younger, before I started asking DH to come with me, there was a nurse in the room whenever the doctor or NP was male.

The last time a nurse was in the room with me was during my colposcopy some 20 years ago - and that was strictly to assist. All other visits with that doc were unchaperoned by a nurse.

When I moved my care back to a family practice, whether being examined by the doctor or the nurse practitioner, no nurse has been in the room - albeit the examiner has been female each time.