Exquisite discussion

For the record, I liked this book overall, but why did Lena have to be such a b**** to Mason? In theory, I understood her thinking that if she didn't let anyone into her heart , then she'd never have to experience losing someone like she lost her sister. But the way she went about it was so abrasive and off putting. And it just didn't jibe with the fact that 1) she became a doctor...a pediatrician, no less. Talk about a difficult profession for someone who has issues with death and loss! 2) she was a very compassionate doctor but her coworkers complained about her and 3) she had let her BFF Shelly and Catherine into her heart. Seems the loss of one of them would hit closer to home and bring up the whole thing with her sister's death.

Why was it just men she had issue letting get close to her??? Seems that'd make more sense if she had lost a boyfriend or husband, not her sister.

Anyone else have any thoughts?

BkGurl wrote: "For the record, I liked this book overall, but why did Lena have to be such a b**** to Mason? In theory, I understood her thinking that if she didn't let anyone into her heart , then she'd never ha..."

You just reiterated my entire review to a 't!' LOL I liked parts of the book, but an unlikable heroine--no matter how much I love the hero--does me in every time.

I found her bitchiness to Mason was a bit over the top but put it down to her equating relationships with men = happiness, which she thought she didn't deserve. Another thing that puzzled me was why she didn't use 'patient confidentiality' as her defence about not telling Mason about his mum. As a doctor she wouldn't have been allowed to discuss Mason's mum with him without her consent or is it different in the US?

Christine wrote: "I found her bitchiness to Mason was a bit over the top but put it down to her equating relationships with men = happiness, which she thought she didn't deserve. Another thing that puzzled me was w..."

This puzzled me as well. And she also had a young patient whose case she shared with him, as well as the patient's name.

No it's no different in the US. I dont think it would have made a difference to Mason if she used that excuse. Although it would prob be most physicians' reasoning for not mentioning what she found. As Catherine's friend and not her treating physician she shouldn't have peeked at her chart in the first place.

I do understand Lena's conundrum because she did tell Catherine to tell her children but Catherine didn't want them to know. It was Catherine's news to tell, so I don't blame Lena there. Lena wasn't being mean in not telling Mason, she was being loyal to Catherine as a long-time friend. But Catherine should have never asked that of her considering Lena was in a relationship with Mason.

Thanks for clarifying that, I thought it would be the same in the US.