As long as they have the money, that is the glory of privatized healthcare. You either believe in the elimination of the Hippocratic oath or you don’t. Rational self interest dictates the former, pragmatic and empathetic reasoning the latter.
There are plenty of things * have had to come to terms with being ideologically in opposition to but work in practice.
I know I’m resurrecting an oldish thread, but over the last few weeks I’ve thought about this one post more than any other. It vexes and irritates me even after I had otherwise tired of this thread.
So I have to ask: What exactly are you talking about here?
It seems to me that you are saying drug users, who inject themselves with poison, who fund narco-insurgents, who only care about themselves and no one else, deserve to be saved… And yet you hate me, despite the fact that I do none of these things. You think that just because I’m not compassionate to criminal drug abusers, I belong among the “worst of humanity” even though my behavior is the exact polar opposite of what these people do to themselves.
What the hell is wrong with you? That is the most inverted morality I’ve ever heard of.
I have a professional and highly skilled job. I have a graduate level education. I don’t commit crimes. I abstain from things that harm myself and others. I pay attention to my diet and my fitness. I have done everything I possibly can to earn a place among the productive and law abiding members of a civilized society. I improve myself to meet the standard, instead of arguing that the standard should be lowered to accomodate my selfish, childish needs.
And yet your morality is so twisted that you think I am the “worst of humanity?” Your concept of good and evil has been so completely reversed I can’t even comprehend how it got that way.
What is wrong with you people?
Let me get this straight.
You’re talking to a guy who, everyday, goes out and breaks his back helping the desperate and damaged, doing everything he can to save lives, while you sit on your ass and cackle about how he should let that trash die, it’s their own fault, they’re not worth saving…
…and you’re wondering what’s wrong with his morality?
You’re wishing death on your fellow human beings for making the same mistakes any of us could make. Don’t think for a second that it couldn’t happen to you. You could get into a car accident and end up hooked on painkillers.
You’re experiencing cognitive dissonance. Here you have a wealth of information as to why we should save the less fortunate and you know it’s wrong to wish death on people. But you’re not prepared to accept these ideas so your ability to accept input shuts off. There is no point to continuing the discussion if this continues to be the case. You aren’t going to convince us and we aren’t going to convince you. But the fact that you posted this shows a crack in the wall you’ve put up and hopefully your better nature will get the best of you and allow you to develop some empathy.
Saving someone who doesn’t deserve to be saved isn’t morality. That’s the opposite of morality. People who fail deserve punishment.
Imagine I was a judge and a criminal came into the court. He is guilty, but I just wave my gavel and say, “Case dismissed, no punishment.” And everyone says how merciful and compassionate I am. Except that he deserved punishment, so by letting him escape I am not serving justice. In fact, that would be an injustice. And that is the problem with this model of morality.
I don’t have a job in medicine precisely because I couldn’t live with myself if I was forced to help so some who didn’t deserve to be helped. If anything, you have contributed to the problem, because this kind of stupidity and criminality only exists because people continue to tolerate it!
If I was as bad off as some of these retarded fucksticks, I would shoot myself in the head. Because I can’t comprehend how these people even look themselves in the mirror. Because I actually have dignity and a scrap of self respect.
It’s not unique at all. Health problems caused by obesity are treated even though they were perfectly avoidable. Drivers who got into an accident because they went over the speed limit still receive medical attention. Workers who didn’t follow the safety procedures when operating heavy equipment are rushed to the hospital. People participating in solitary nautical races are rescued even though they put themselves in this predicament.
I see no particular reason to single out drug addicts, let alone meth addicts as opposed to the vastly more numerous alcohol addicts and nicotine addicts.
The opposite of morality? Wow. So, I take it you’re not a Christian? I mean, neither am I, but I’ve always sort of thought his philosophy that nobody is beyond saving to be kind of beautiful. Certainly, more appealing than your, “Fuck 'em, let 'em die,” approach to morality.
It’s easy to act morally towards people you like. The real test of character is how you treat people you hate.
That’s a difficult analogy to rebut, because it’s so inapt I can’t quite see how you think it relates to the discussion at hand, so I’m not sure what I should be arguing against.
I mean, I could argue that, maybe you should be letting that guy go, depending on the justness of the law he’s accused of violating. I could point out that a judge operates in a specific role that’s necessary to the functioning of society, and that necessarily impacts how he has to act on things like this, while you and I are under no such restriction. I could point out that, if you want to punish a drug addict, he needs to be alive to do it, so you should save him from his overdose so that he doesn’t escape his punishment. I could point out that, letting a dangerous criminal go free places other people in danger, while helping a drug addict survive his overdoes endangers no one at all.
Well, that’s demonstrably false. There’s lots of countries in the world that have drug policies even more draconian than what you’re advocating here. Guess what? They still have drug addicts.
The difference is that the meth addict did it to himself. I realize the heart attack guy may be overweight, etc., but the bottom line is that he did not try to inflict the heart attack on himself, whereas the meth addict (or any other kind) is knowingly and deliberately fucking himself up.
I say treat them in the ER after all the truly sick and injured people are taken care of first.
A good handful of my students have had previous problems with addictions. They move on, through determination, grace, support, and sometimes legal restrictions to become professionals who are very helpful in the community. I just interviewed one graduate who is now on faculty at a university. That person said, “When I came into the undergraduate program, I was one week sober.”
That’s not how triage works.
This is merely your opinion, if you are going to assert that the meth head is ‘deliberately fucking themselves up’ then I expect to see you quote some evidence to this effect.
What you do find is that an addiction is so overwhelming that it generates its own dynamic, it becomes completely fundamental to the existence for the addict, there is very little choice in the matter at all.
You cannot have even the slightest idea of the power of an addiction or you just would not post such rubbish.
Next, the overweight or poor diet person who ends up with a heart attack cannot possibly be unaware of the dangers they risk in being overweight, so that makes them complicit in their illness - so your logic is that we must not treat them and must leave them to make the best of it, and the number of obese individuals far outnumbers the numbers of drug addicts.
Current estimates of drug addicted Americans are up to 23 million from the main categories of pharma substances- around 9%, yet the number of obese is around 35% of all Americans, nearly 4 times as many. I assume that these people also deserve not to be treated because after all nobody forced them to put all that food into their mouths.
How about smokers, maybe we don’t treat those for all the diseases they get, such as, heart attacks (main cause of death) emphysema, thrombosis, cancer and even lack of fertility - that’s around twice as many people as are hooked on one substance or another.
I wonder what percentage of Americans do not participate in physical activity, well according to the report I have just read it seems that only 32% actually take part in a health level of activity, so I guess we can just write the rest of America off can’t we?
http://www.physicalactivitycouncil.com/pdfs/current.pdf
What happens to those who are irresponsible enough to partake in several of these risky practices? maybe we decide to shoot them before they actually become ill, after all it would be cheaper, oh wait maybe not, taking part in risky activity has not yet become a capital offence
Your argument is emotive, it is also lacking in logic and objectivity, and above all it lacks facts, I have not noted a single citable quote in your series of posts.
I will also point out another thing, whilst on their way to their self imposed death row those untreated meth addicts will be living in some place, maybe next to you and they will not die on their first fix, nor their second, at some point these untreated addicts will be looking at all those nice shiny things that you may possess and carry - lets hope the rehab centres get to the meth heads before the meth heads get around to you eh?
And who are you to say who deserves to be saved or not ? Is this you, Zeus ?
No kid, when asked what he or she wants to grow up and be, answers “drug addict!” Nobody wants to be an addict.
As a previous poster put it so well, many (I’d venture to say most) addicts aren’t slavering heroin fiends passed out in an alley. They are teachers, lawyers, moms, dads, clergy, et al. Within professional strata, docors and nurses have an alarming rate of abuse (especially anesthesiologists).These are folks with intimate knowledge of the disasters drugs can wreak.
Which, I think, illustrates the power of addiction. Our minds are wired to seek pleasure; sometimes this is found through jogging, other times in opiates. I, of course, don’t wish a drug addiction on anyone, but it you’ve never had this struggle or seen a loved one struggling, it is nigh impossible to understand why folks seek drugs and have done so for eons and eons.
Take it from someone who knows: “there but for the Grace of God go I” applies to anyone carting around a glob of grey matter saturated in powerful, pleasure-seeking chemicals AKA “human.”
I disagree. I fully believe that some hardcore drug addicts, mostly of heroin, started using drugs on purpose because they think addiction is cool.
We need to stop glamorizing drug addiction, that’s for sure.
I have been a hard-working, tax paying, compassionate member of society for the last 29 years.
Before that, I was a person that several members with a smug sense of superiority in this thread would gladly see die.
I was talking with a friend of mine yesterday. Guy with a great job, wife and teenage kid who he loves and provides for. HE has been a hard-working, tax paying, church-going,compassionate member of society for the last 33 years. Before that, he was someone some members of this thread would gladly see die. Are me and him alone? Hardly. There are thousands upon thousands of us.
We are generally pretty grateful that our family members didn’t give up on us. We are grateful that when someone called 911 on us, EMTs and paramedics came, and doctors and nurses did their best.
As far as your disdain for addicts in general, yeah, we can be a sorry lot. And frustrating as hell. But don’t kid yourself and think your bloodline is immune. You may have one of us in your family now. Parents, siblings, spouses, cousins. We addicts come from all walks. Doctors, nurses, psychiatrists, lawyers, cops, judges, preachers, accountants, athletes, mechanics, housewives… Maybe you have, or will have a child who will be like us. Surely you would want medical professionals to try help them if they were ODing. At least with them you might harbor a belief that someday they will get better. And you know what? They just might. Because people can change. They can get better. Redeem themselves. They shouldn’t be allowed to die just so you can save a few bucks. They may still have something to offer society.
There’s really no telling which ones will and which ones won’t.
The OP is definitely off my Christmas card list.
For now, anyway.
One day that meth addict might be you or someone about whom you care.
How do we know that he’s capable of caring for anyone?
Wait, heroin chic is bad?
I thought obesity was bad. Make up your mind.
Why save people with cancer?