Drug-seekers, again

PROPOSAL: RENAMING THIS DISCUSSION THREAD

Removing the self-serving veils that shroud these rituals of trivialization (by indifference), demonization (by hearsay offerings, and as little as mere speculation by virtually any member of the “health care team”), and ostracization (by creating a lumpen underclass of “untouchable” patients) of fellow human beings (whether or not they, like you …

… (perhaps) physicians should not (under the guise of the dubious rubric of “life-coach” or “savior”) begrudge other citizens in their (implicitly human) pursuits (via their own personal lifestyles) of experiences of *any* kind that engender “feelings of well-being”, joy, inspiration, and relief in general of our own personal sufferings (whether such suffering is of either a physiological, emotional, or spiritual basis).

Should we not (in a free society) afford some tolerance and understanding of peaceful personal behaviors as not necessarily rightfully exempted from being considered as “… the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety” that our Declaration of Independence (and not one of dependence on other persons) affords the exercise of personal religious beliefs, worship, and conscience?

THUS, my proposal for widening the scope of this thread to the more comprehensive and revealing set of elements:
“The Games that All Involved Parties Play primarily in order to Benefit and Protect their Own Self-Interests”.

One of the most influential of our nation’s minds, and seer regarding our society’s recognition of the dangers of the potential “tyranny of the majority”, once wrote:

“… They consisted of a governing One, or a governing tribe or caste, who derived their authority from inheritance or conquest, who, at all events, did not hold it at the pleasure of the governed, and whose supremacy men did not venture, perhaps did not desire, to contest, whatever precautions might be taken against its oppressive exercise.” …

and

… “The aim, therefore, of patriots was to set limits to the power which the ruler should be suffered to
exercise over the community; and this limitation
was what they meant by liberty.”

-John Stewart Mill, On Liberty

Yes, indeed, physicians take an oath to “do no harm”. Yes, indeed, the physician as a human being struggles in the face of a “medical-industrial-complex” and legal framework which places the physician one step up from the bottom tier of discretion and power inhabited by the allegedly served patients themselves.

As we might ask ourselves the rhetorical question, “to whom do should I dedicate my allegiance, support, and advocacy (other than myself)?”, a reinvestigation of the Hippocratic Oath (excerpted below) provokes thought:

“I swear by Apollo, the healer, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgment, the following Oath and agreement:” …

… “I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.” …

“… In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing …”

… “All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.”.

I don’t see any mentions in the Oath regarding the primacy of the State, Insurance Industry, Corporate Employer, or (even) the physician themselves with respect to the intended allegiances sworn to.

But, how sophomoric of me to posit that the things that persons say and substantively do ought to comport with genuine, honest, and straightforwardly expressed intentions. Perhaps I need “professional help” … Then again, … I think not.

Regards, DR
.