Dr. Crusher was the weak link of the show

[Rom's Sehlat]

Troi was promoted in "Thine Own Self."

DATA: Were you promoted in my absence?
TROI: Yes, so from now on you may address me as "sir."
DATA: ...Yes, sir.
*polite chuckle throughout room*

 

[indolover]

so.... your philosophy is to be quiet about your morals and values and not stand up for them? Not a bumper sticker I can endorse.


Do you have a similar problem with McCoy's frequent criticisms of the Vulcan path?

In the real world, a physician should not impinge on the personal values/morals of the patient, in the course of treating him/her. A physician should also not question or criticise a patient's morals, and should accept his/her personality/thinking as is. This is standard medical ethics/practice. This is why doctors often tailor their treatments for specific religious groups; in short it's not a doctor's place to question why a patient believes in xyz, or why xyz treatment should supersede his/her morals.

Crusher said that Worf was being stubborn, but Klingons can't live as disabled, it's just not conducive to their value system. It just seems arrogant that Crusher expected Worf to forgo all of his people's traditions, which his God laid down centuries before then, simply because it seems offensive/objectionable to her.

it's "arrogant" of her to lay down her perspective on things? So, free speech takes a back seat to offending someone's cultural beliefs?


So, basically what you're saying is that one's cultural beliefs shouldn't be questioned..... because they're cultural beliefs? That's circular, and it's hard to see how change would ever come to a society without the free exchange of different viewpoints.

there's a big difference between accepting someone might DISAGREE with your values and saying that a person shouldn't even be allowed to have a conversation about it.


seems like there's a lot of advocacy of thought policing in this thread.

lol.. You're missing the point.

Beverly can think what she wants, she's a free human being. But she was not accounting for Worf's own beliefs in his treatment. A doctor should never discount the personal values of a patient, especially when treating them.

To use another example, some belief systems don't believe in blood transfusions. A doctor should not openly question why this is the case, or why he should go along with it, that's not his business. Simply respect it, and find an alternative solution.

Crusher was suggesting treatment methods that Worf rejected, because his culture/belief system didn't allow it. It's not her place to say Worf should do xyz simply because she dislikes Klingon culture or finds it distasteful (yeah, like billions of Klingons give a shit what one human Starfleet doctor thinks).

Picard and Riker did not say Worf had no right to think or believe as he did. It's not their place to say otherwise also.

 

[sonak]

In the real world, a physician should not impinge on the personal values/morals of the patient, in the course of treating him/her. A physician should also not question or criticise a patient's morals, and should accept his/her personality/thinking as is. This is standard medical ethics/practice. This is why doctors often tailor their treatments for specific religious groups; in short it's not a doctor's place to question why a patient believes in xyz, or why xyz treatment should supersede his/her morals.

Crusher said that Worf was being stubborn, but Klingons can't live as disabled, it's just not conducive to their value system. It just seems arrogant that Crusher expected Worf to forgo all of his people's traditions, which his God laid down centuries before then, simply because it seems offensive/objectionable to her.

it's "arrogant" of her to lay down her perspective on things? So, free speech takes a back seat to offending someone's cultural beliefs?


So, basically what you're saying is that one's cultural beliefs shouldn't be questioned..... because they're cultural beliefs? That's circular, and it's hard to see how change would ever come to a society without the free exchange of different viewpoints.

there's a big difference between accepting someone might DISAGREE with your values and saying that a person shouldn't even be allowed to have a conversation about it.


seems like there's a lot of advocacy of thought policing in this thread.

lol.. You're missing the point.

Beverly can think what she wants, she's a free human being. But she was not accounting for Worf's own beliefs in his treatment. A doctor should never discount the personal values of a patient, especially when treating them.

To use another example, some belief systems don't believe in blood transfusions. A doctor should not openly question why this is the case, or why he should go along with it, that's not his business. Simply respect it, and find an alternative solution.

Crusher was suggesting treatment methods that Worf rejected, because his culture/belief system didn't allow it. It's not her place to say Worf should do xyz simply because she dislikes Klingon culture or finds it distasteful (yeah, like billions of Klingons give a shit what one human Starfleet doctor thinks).

Picard and Riker did not say Worf had no right to think or believe as he did. It's not their place to say otherwise also.

As a doctor, she's supposed to bring up any and all possible treatments that might help Worf. Worf is of course free to reject those treatments he considers to be violating his beliefs or how he wants to live his life.

As long as she's not forcing treatment on him that he doesn't want, or denying him treatment that he does want, she's doing her job.

 

[Takeru]

On the other hand, can you imagine if Marina Sirtis had been cast as Macha Hernandez after all? I'm not sure that would have worked at all. Every episode would have been like "Face of the Enemy" as she "SAYS EVERYTHING IN A SHOUTY UNCONVINCING ANGRY VOICE".

I don't think so, in "Face of the enemy" Sirtis was still playing Troi, the shouty unconvincing angry voice was probably a deliberate choice on her part, because it made sense in context.
If she had been cast as Hernandez she might have chosen to deliver her lines differently. I actually think Marina Sirtis is a good actress, the biggest problem with Troi was the writing.

 

[Snaploud]

Troi was promoted in "Thine Own Self."

DATA: Were you promoted in my absence?
TROI: Yes, so from now on you may address me as "sir."
DATA: ...Yes, sir.
*polite chuckle throughout room*

Ugh...one of the worst moments of TNG... It's bad enough that they promoted her over Data...They just had to rub it in...

 

[Rom's Sehlat]

I thought that scene was supposed to be humorous. I really didn't know the history of the characters-- for example, was Troi in Starfleet longer than Data was? But anyway, she's no command officer. She's a shrink! She doesn't threaten his command in any way, shape, or form.

 

[sonak]

TNG REALLY botched the whole "command line officer" vs. "specialty(or staff) officer" thing.



in the military, chaplains, doctors, etc. do have the same officer ranks for paygrade purposes and within their own structures as other officers. However, those not in the line of command wouldn't take over from those who are even in cases where they might outrank them.



Troi was a psychologist who had the extra advantage of being an empath. She wasn't trained in being a bridge officer. She had no business taking command in "Disaster," as that should have fallen to Ro Laren.

It was ludicrous that she could take a "commander test" to have her outrank DATA, or that Dr. Crusher would be able to.


of course, they could justify it any way they want by saying Starfleet either isn't military or is quasi-military, but it was still silly.

 

[Tomalak]

It was ludicrous that she could take a "commander test" to have her outrank DATA, or that Dr. Crusher would be able to.

Pulaski was a commander too, but Data was still senior because he was second officer.

The "call me sir" line was a joke.

On the other hand, they all do the same basic training, they are still officers. In the specific instance of Troi in "Disaster", she deferred to others on the bridge for advice, and then took appropriate action. Ro would have separated the ship, which would not have allowed Riker and Data's head to Save The Day. In other words, she took a big decision and it paid off.

 

[Snaploud]

I thought that scene was supposed to be humorous. I really didn't know the history of the characters-- for example, was Troi in Starfleet longer than Data was? But anyway, she's no command officer. She's a shrink! She doesn't threaten his command in any way, shape, or form.

According to the Starfleet Academy TNG books (which have a timeline at the beginning of each book):

Jean-Luc Picard entered Starfleet Academy in 2323.

Data entered Starfleet Academy in 2341.

Beverly Crusher entered Starfleet Academy Medical School in 2342.

William T. Riker and Geordi La Forge entered Starfleet Academy in 2353.

Deanna Troi entered Starfleet Academy in 2354 (memory-alpha says 2355).

Tasha Yar entered Starfleet Academy in 2356.

Worf entered Starfleet Academy in 2357.

 

[sonak]

It was ludicrous that she could take a "commander test" to have her outrank DATA, or that Dr. Crusher would be able to.

Pulaski was a commander too, but Data was still senior because he was second officer.

The "call me sir" line was a joke.

On the other hand, they all do the same basic training, they are still officers. In the specific instance of Troi in "Disaster", she deferred to others on the bridge for advice, and then took appropriate action. Ro would have separated the ship, which would not have allowed Riker and Data's head to Save The Day. In other words, she took a big decision and it paid off.

well of course Troi's decision paid off, it was a TNG show, and the point was to show that Troi could make the big decisions!


But realistically, she shouldn't have been in that position. Troi's a psychologist, a specialized position, she shouldn't have been in the chain of command in the first place.

Seniority applies with folks of the same rank, but a newly promoted Commander is still higher ranking than a Lt. Commander even if the Lt. Commander has twenty years of seniority over the Commander.


rank beats seniority as surely as rock beats scissors.