What’s next?

Posted on 29/06/2010 | 2 Comments

What people are saying?

Nick Ross said...

Great! Look forward to it.

Comment made on July 14th, 2010

Dr. Mark Agresti said...

I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, I think a lot of it is stigma within the world of medical professionals, some of it might come from the corporate mentality a good bit of it may actually be the media (I’ll explain my theories on that in a minute).

I think that many doctors have a certain “idea” of themselves, and a rather fictional one at that. They see themselves in the super-busy, physical life threat situations depicted in shows like ER or Grey’s Anatomy because it seems like what they should be doing. It’s more action-packed to treat those who are physically wounded and on their death bed (something others can see with their own eyes) rather than someone who is in the same boat but their life-threatening condition can’t be seen (save for a few tears and the shakes). I don’t like to think of doctors in this way, but I would be turning a blind eye if I thought that none of them act in this way. The truth is, many doctors get a rush from what they do because a physically ailing patient creates a stage for them to strut their stuff. How else could they be seen as death-defying heroes?

In terms of the corporate mentality, we all have to remember that it’s not exactly the doctors and surgeons who run a hospital. There is in fact a Board, fully of stuffy, stiff-collared men and women who care more about dollar signs and public reputation than the patients they see. Most have never actually been doctors or health professionals themselves. They’re simply well-off individuals who purchased stock or donated thousands or millions and therefore have a say in how patients are cared for. They too want their hospital to be seen like one of the prime time TV shows - with people racing everywhere, physical emergencies one right after another and doctors making controversial but potentially life-saving calls. And all because it makes their hospital “look good” to the public. I doubt that these types of people recognize mental illness for what it really is because mental illness isn’t always something someone else can see. Just imagine if doctors in a hospital took cases as they came and then a car accident victim in cardiac arrest comes in. What will those doctors and that hospital look like if they ask that patient (or the patient’s family) to wait for someone who, on the outside, does not seem to have a problem? There would definitely be publicity, but not the good kind. The family of a physically injured person on the way to dying is never going to see mental illness as a condition as serious as what their family member is going through. Therefore, the big, bad Board will not either.

And all of this is fed by the media. We have notions of what hospitals are supposed to be like, what they’re supposed to take more seriously, from night time television and high-paced surgery documentaries on Discovery Health. We’ve been brainwashed (for lack of a better word) into thinking that those kind of high-paced physical issues matter more. So anything else, especially something that can’t always be physically seen like mental illness, will take a back burner.

I hate that the world of medicine has come to this. But unfortunately, people’s consciences don’t catch up to them for the decisions they make in a hospital until they’re being sued by the family of a suicide victim because they didn’t take immediate action. Very sad, but all too true…

Comment made on August 05th, 2010

What do you think?


Filter by category

Filter by date

Recent Comment

This is a great set of comments and rings very true. 

I totally agree that scientists (just like everyone else) have their biases and foibles.  After all, scientists are human beings too!  But science is different than scientists. 

The scientific method is the most objective frame that we have by which to evaluate and predict.  Science is not about finding truth.  It is only about being less wrong most of the time.  The scientific method (experimental design and mathematics) gives us the ability to test what we believe.  The scientific method is not used to prove something is correct, on the contrary, the scientific method is designed to prove that something is not correct!  It is designed to test what is called the “null hypothesis”.  It takes ideas that come out of left field (or wherever else they come from) and puts those ideas to an independent test.

t does not drive our beliefs.  It does however challenge our beliefs.  In that way it is self-correcting. Of course scientific inquiry and understanding lives within a wider social context.  That is one of the great features of science. 

But gravity is gravity, social context notwithstanding.  And thus it is nasty, brutish and long.  As Brecht said, (something like this) - the purpose of science is to save us from everlasting error.

By Christina Carew on May 11th

You can find us here too!

  • image
  • image
  • image

We would like to say thanks...

Without their help this initiative would not be possible. Thanks for you help.

  • image
  • image
  • image