What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Oddish]

Controversial opinion(?): I like both Crusher and Pulaski, and I'm not a fan of how in that discussion preferring one is so frequently expressed through diminishing the other.

Because they were so different, people frequently have a strong preference. Also, reportedly, Pulaski's departure was not widely mourned. Given the title of this topic, it might be considered a "controversial opinion" to have liked her better.

But you're right, they both had their strengths.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

I liked both doctors but did prefer Crusher

 

[Farscape One]

It was a real missed opportunity not having BOTH Crusher and Pulaski in the same episode. They are both very professional and good at their jobs, but they go about in very different ways. "Ethics", as I'm sure has been mentioned before, was the perfect episode to utilize them both.

 

[Oddish]

It was a real missed opportunity not having BOTH Crusher and Pulaski in the same episode. They are both very professional and good at their jobs, but they go about in very different ways. "Ethics", as I'm sure has been mentioned before, was the perfect episode to utilize them both.

Honestly, I never saw Pulaski as unethical. Just insensitive.

 

[Farscape One]

I completely agree with you that Pulaski was not unethical. That wasn't my point.

Pulaski seemed like she would respect Worf's cultural belief in ritual suicide due to the paralysis. Crusher was staunchly against it and essentially forced her beliefs on him. This is where the conflict between them would occur... Pulaski was shown to at least have some familiarity with Klingon culture and definitely has respect for it. Crusher is rather myopic in her view for saving lives. In that regard it's Crusher who is the insensitive one.

(To be fair, I'm not knocking the trait. It's a good one to have. But when you start pushing your values onto your patient, that's a line that should never be crossed. This is my main problem with Crusher overall.)

I do, however, disagree with you about Pulaski being insensitive. I would say she's more upfront with her patients. She's not a hardass with her patients, but she certainly doesn't use kid gloves, either. In her dealings with command level officers, though, I would say she's a more argumentative person, but Crusher is just as guilty of that.

 

[Oddish]

Pulaski seemed like she would respect Worf's cultural belief in ritual suicide due to the paralysis. Crusher was staunchly against it and essentially forced her beliefs on him. This is where the conflict between them would occur... Pulaski was shown to at least have some familiarity with Klingon culture and definitely has respect for it. Crusher is rather myopic in her view for saving lives. In that regard it's Crusher who is the insensitive one.

That actually would have been a good potential conflict. Pulaski, more than most others, seemed to "get" Worf.

 

[Lord Garth]

They should make a TV Movie that takes place 120 years before DSC Season 3, showing the Federation in general and a core group of people's lives immediately before The Burn and how they coped with it during it and immediately afterwards. I'd have it focus on Sahil's ancestors.

 

[Macintosh]

That actually would have been a good potential conflict. Pulaski, more than most others, seemed to "get" Worf.

I've heard that had Pulaski stayed around after season two there was a plan for her and Worf to have a romantic relationship of some description. I don't know how accurate that is or if it's just speculation/wishful thinking.

 

[Oddish]

I think she was a little old for him. If she'd been played by Diana Mulder circa 1967...

 

[JesterFace]

Controversial opinion(?): I like both Crusher and Pulaski, and I'm not a fan of how in that discussion preferring one is so frequently expressed through diminishing the other.

Enterprise had a lot of people on board, why not have both....

 

[Oddish]

True; sickbay would need a doctor on duty 24-7. And Beverly's not an android, so she can't do it alone.

 

[Turtletrekker]

We saw Dr Selar once and we heard her name over the intercom a couple times after that.

 

[JesterFace]

True; sickbay would need a doctor on duty 24-7.

Probably more than one on duty 24/7? Especially when some disaster strikes.

 

[Paul Weaver]

Probably more than one on duty 24/7? Especially when some disaster strikes.

When a disaster strikes, off duty personnel will be called in and be on site in a few minutes - unless there's some for of Disaster preventing people travelling the ship and Worf has to become a midwife, but then patients wouldn't be able to get to sickbay anyway.

I suspect you're unlikely to need any more than a single nurse overnight, and only if you've got patients in sickbay (which seems unlikely). In the UK there is about 1 hospital bed for every 500 people, meaning about 2 people in sickbay on average, but the enterprise has fewer old people who need more hospital treatment, no bed blocking, better in-quarters monitoring, as well as more advanced healthcare. Most of the time nobody would be an inpatient, the rest of the time the doctor is just a few minutes away.

You'd need two doctors on a ship without an EMH in case one of them needs a doctor, or one dies on an away team, but sickbay actually seems the right sort of scale for a ship with about 1000 people on board. That theres only 1000 people on board a ship that size is a whole separate issue.

 

[Vger23]

When a disaster strikes, off duty personnel will be called in and be on site in a few minutes - unless there's some for of Disaster preventing people travelling the ship and Worf has to become a midwife, but then patients wouldn't be able to get to sickbay anyway.

I suspect you're unlikely to need any more than a single nurse overnight, and only if you've got patients in sickbay (which seems unlikely). In the UK there is about 1 hospital bed for every 500 people, meaning about 2 people in sickbay on average, but the enterprise has fewer old people who need more hospital treatment, no bed blocking, better in-quarters monitoring, as well as more advanced healthcare. Most of the time nobody would be an inpatient, the rest of the time the doctor is just a few minutes away.

You'd need two doctors on a ship without an EMH in case one of them needs a doctor, or one dies on an away team, but sickbay actually seems the right sort of scale for a ship with about 1000 people on board. That theres only 1000 people on board a ship that size is a whole separate issue.

In my mind, it’s 1,000 crew…and many more family members and civilian support personnel (Guinan, Ben, Mott, etc).

 

[Paul Weaver]

Alas in "Remember Me" it was confirmed the number on board was around 1,000

CRUSHER: Jean-Luc, if I might ask, how many people are there on board?
PICARD: One thousand and fourteen, including your guest, Doctor Quaice.
LAFORGE: Is there something wrong with that count, Doctor?
CRUSHER: No. That's the exact number there should be.

That said, the same episode said there should be at least 4 crewmembers in sickbay at any one time. That's still a minimum of 12 medical staff for 1000 people with 56 hour weeks which I guess isn't terrible - 1 in 50 Americans are hospital workers, so if it were 1 in 50 Enterprise residents that would be 20 medical staff, plenty to meet the minimum if everyone works 56 hour weeks, and just about work out if you work a constant 40 hours/week (you'd need 17 medical staff)

 

[Oddish]

And three doctors (Selar, Pulaski, and Crusher) would be reasonable under those circumstances, since the Enterprise D didn't have an EMH. Though not sure if Pulaski would be Ok with a demotion.

 

[at Quark's]

I'd agree with this. I was never a massive Kes fan, but "Fury" undid everything worthwhile about her character development and cheapened her exit hugely.

I agree... in my view, Fury is far, far worse than often reviled episodes such as Threshold. That episode may have been a mess in terms of logic and how concepts evolution 'evolution' were used, but it didn't leave a foul taste in my mouth like Fury did.

 

[Oddish]

"Threshold" and "These Are the Voyages" are similar in that they could be acceptable if lackluster episodes with a little judicious tweaking.

 

[Farscape One]

I agree... in my view, Fury is far, far worse than often reviled episodes such as Threshold. That episode may have been a mess in terms of logic and how concepts evolution 'evolution' were used, but it didn't leave a foul taste in my mouth like Fury did.

Completely agreed. "THRESHOLD" is actually pretty good until you get the explanation on what happened to Tom at the end. It's a great horror piece before that, and it's a good character episode for him.

"FURY", on the other hand, does nothing for the characters, and in fact detracts from Kes and her exit. The only good thing that episode did was explain why Wildman was pregnant for as long as she was, and it gave us one last look at the Vidiians. (Which I have always maintained was the show's best antagonists, both conceptually and in appearance.)