or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Why Do People Follow Medical Authorities?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why Do People Follow Medical Authorities? - Page 6  

post #101 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdentityCrisisMama View Post

While you and I may not feel that life experience is a good enough reason to paint most/all doctors with a broad brush, many people make decisions based on their own personal experiences. You are welcome to share why you feel that there may be better ways to establish trust in doctors than personal experience, debating whether a member is bashing or not is OT. 

 

I do see your point, to each his own and all that - it just seems like a double standard when, say, I cannot go into the UC forum and talk about how one mom died doing UC so therefore all UC is unacceptably dangerous and evil.  I also cannot go into the "I'm Not Vaccinating" forum and say, I know of a kid who died from not being vaxed, so therefore all parents in this forum are horribly negligent and awful.  Even if it wasn't against the UA, it would start a huge flame war.  It seems like the only time this kind of "painting" is cool is if it's Western medicine because they are the evil establishment, so they can take the hit - do you see what I mean?

post #102 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post

"Bashing" is saying things like "I know one (or two) doctors who give bad advice about breastfeeding; therefore, I conclude and state as fact that doctors don't know anything about breastfeeding".  That kind of extrapolation is absurd.  I encountered one terrible lactation consultant.  Should I be posting unqualified statements that lactation consultants don't care about babies?

 

Most people I know IRL who do not like a profession have a laundry lists of reasons why.  It is often more than one or two bad experiences.

 

Let's say I saw 5 lactation consultants for separate issues with separate nurselings.  Let's say none of them were able to help me.  I might not conclude that all lactation consultants are bad, but I might very well conclude that the likelihood of a LC being able to help me is low.

post #103 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by pickle18 View Post

Ok, maybe it is just me, and that's fine.  Carry on!  I just feel like some people seem to be far less forgiving of doctors than midwives or, as chickabiddy mentioned, lactation consultants, for example. 

I'm a regular on the homebirth forum and I can tell you that we do have some members who post from a perspective of not trusting that model of care. Both, from members who had a bad experience and from members who have other reasons to not trust homebirth. I think the topic of trust for Western medicine doctors is more common because of how important they are in all of our lives (for good or bad). Even members on this thread who really resent them and have such a negative regard for them have had to interact with them, yk?  Even if you manage to avoid them for your own care. I have a friend, for instance, who practices Ayurveda both as a practitioner and a client and she spent the last two years in and out of hospitals for her parents' care. Add a bit of confirmation bias into the mix and it's even easier to understand how deep a person's convictions can go in this regard. (Not saying folks here have confirmation bias -- just mean to say that it's such a common human tendency that it helps to understand how other people come to such different opinions) 

post #104 of 198

With something like UC, if a person doesn't trust having a UC - they always have the option to not have one and not hang out with folks who have them. This can absolutely not be said about doctors for the absolute vast majority of people. Does that make sense?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by pickle18 View Post

 

I do see your point, to each his own and all that - it just seems like a double standard when, say, I cannot go into the UC forum and talk about how one mom died doing UC so therefore all UC is unacceptably dangerous and evil. 

This is all really OT but I would like to clarify something. Some forums are "support only" and the things you are describing would not be allowed there because those forums have been designated for support (usually because a member or group have petitioned a need for that - I think). There is usually another forum where folks can go and say what you're describing and folks can respond. How the thread like that goes depends on the members reading and posting. If you want to see an example of a mainstream viewpint posting with anecdotal stuff, just read about any ultrasound thread in the homebirth forum! banghead.gif orngbiggrin.gif

 

You are welcome to respond to folks on this thread about the issue of trust and if you can find a way to word your questions about how they can feel they have made an informed decision based on just a few experiences, you are welcome to do that...so long as it's relatively OT and within the UA. 

 

I hope that clears this up....

 

Any more questions about MDC forums and where and what is allowed and why should be taken to PM. Thansk

post #105 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

 

Most people I know IRL who do not like a profession have a laundry lists of reasons why.  It is often more than one or two bad experiences.

 

Maybe, maybe not.  I'm referring specifically to two posts on this thread stating categorically that doctors do not receive training in breastfeeding:  one had a sample size of two and one had a sample size of one.  That kind of extrapolation does not lead to useful discussion.

post #106 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by pickle18 View Post

  kathymuggle - you may be right, maybe people do bash those things on here, but I haven't seen much of it.  

I think we (general "we") see what we want to see.  People are pattern makers, and they tend to look at things that reinforce those patterns.  

 

I think those who tend towards the crunchy side see more slights against crunchy; I think those on the mainstream side see more slights against mainstream.

 

I have been on here forever (ignore start date).  Only in the past few months have I actually been able to see subtle slights against the other side, whatever that side might be.  I am sure I still miss some.  We are all narcissists (joke) and tend to focus on our issues and our POV.  My 2cents.gif

post #107 of 198

Adequate sample size for how folks come to decisions is OT. Feel free to move that discussion to a new thread. 

post #108 of 198

Thanks, IdentityCrisisMama - sorry to pull the discussion off course.  I do understand the need for support forums - I just felt the vibe was vaguely hypocritical, but you helped me clarify my thoughts.  I suppose I should have asked...if you base your lack of trust on limited personal experiences, do you feel you do the same with natural health professionals or practices?  Or do natural health professionals (chiropractor, naturopath, herbalist, midwives, etc.) get a little more slack/start out on a more positive footing/get benefit of the doubt?  Do you think the frequency of your negative experiences might have to do with increased frequency of contact with Western medicine?  Or frustration with the circumstances which made Western medicine your only choice?  Or, as others have mentioned, limited choice of care providers due to insurance constraints?  

 

That would be more helpful, I think.

 

(oh, and kathymuggle is right - I shouldn't paint with a broad brush about MDC either!)

post #109 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post

 

Maybe, maybe not.  I'm referring specifically to two posts on this thread stating categorically that doctors do not receive training in breastfeeding:  one had a sample size of two and one had a sample size of one.  That kind of extrapolation does not lead to useful discussion.

One person said that she did not believe her doctor had received much BF education, based on his erroneous statement.  

 

I don't think anyone said categorically that doctors receive no training in breastfeeding.  

 

OT, a little, but I think referring to peoples experiences and stories as sample sizes is little dehumanising.  The posters are not in a study nor are they claiming they are a study of one.   

post #110 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

I think we (general "we") see what we want to see.  People are pattern makers, and they tend to look at things that reinforce those patterns.  

 

I think those who tend towards the crunchy side see more slights against crunchy; I think those on the mainstream side see more slights against mainstream.

 

I have been on here forever (ignore start date).  Only in the past few months have I actually been able to see subtle slights against the other side, whatever that side might be.  I am sure I still miss some.  We are all narcissists (joke) and tend to focus on our issues and our POV.  My 2cents.gif

 

I am always exploring this in myself - where does my natural psychological need for schema cross over into prejudice?

 

I think I operate in the opposite way because of that - I think if I lean more towards the crunchy side, I'm extra careful not to be hypocritical by allowing bashing against the mainstream, that I wouldn't tolerate against my own preferences.

post #111 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post

Medical school doesn't teach about parenting, yet they feel they are parenting experts. The same is true of breastfeeding (no training), yet they are taught formula is just as good.
post #112 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by pickle18 View Post

 

I think I operate in the opposite way because of that - I think if I lean more towards the crunchy side, I'm extra careful not to be hypocritical by allowing bashing against the mainstream, that I wouldn't tolerate against my own preferences.

thumb.gif

 

I've always found it much more interesting to find things that challenge how I already think. 

post #113 of 198
I mentioned I know, personally, two doctors. Part of my bias comes from personal abuse I endured from them. In addition, I have been misinformed, misdiagnosed, and mistreated by multiple doctors. My son, as well. I was very fortunate that when he had a serious medical issue, and we went to the pediatricians' office unexpectedly, we were seen by the only good doctor in the practice! He did everything right, and my son's recovery was 100%. I never was able to get that doctor again. ALL the parents wanted him!

Do I think ALL doctors are bad or evil? No. Just a majority, at least in my life. Most, as I've stated before, fail to listen properly. Maybe if they taught listening in medical schools I'd have fewer complaints.

My other problem is with doctors believing themselves to be parenting or feeding (nutrition) experts with minimal or no training. If they were honest about their limitations, and refer me to better trained individuals, I'd have more respect. I had no less than three separate doctors tell me I needed to put my baby on IsomilDF (spelling may be wrong) for a diarrhea caused by a virus. I kept repeating that I was breastfeeding, and they repeated themselves AS IF I HADN'T SPOKEN. It wouldn't have bothered me so much if they had at least acknowledged my words, but they didn't give any indication that I would be able to return to breastfeeding. In the end, I got my advice from a breastfeeding counselor (lactation consultat in training) who assured me that continuing to breastfeed was best. She was right. Twenty four hours later he was fine. Was it a risk? Yes. But if I hadn't taken that risk he might have been switched to formula at 14 weeks.

These are only SOME of the stories I have about doctors. Many I do not want to share here. But please don't tell me I'm jumping to conclusions based on one bad experience.

And there is a certain callousness needed by doctors. I'd never be able to give a person an IV. I'd feel the pain. But too much callousness makes it possible for them to give advise without concern for what the patient wants. The good ones have balance, so please don't jump on me about that. But not all have that balance.
post #114 of 198

nm--my post became irrelevant in the time I had the window open before posting! that'll teach me to leave the house without finishing my post. 

post #115 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by pickle18 View Post

Thanks, IdentityCrisisMama - sorry to pull the discussion off course.  I do understand the need for support forums - I just felt the vibe was vaguely hypocritical, but you helped me clarify my thoughts.  I suppose I should have asked...if you base your lack of trust on limited personal experiences, do you feel you do the same with natural health professionals or practices?  Or do natural health professionals (chiropractor, naturopath, herbalist, midwives, etc.) get a little more slack/start out on a more positive footing/get benefit of the doubt?  Do you think the frequency of your negative experiences might have to do with increased frequency of contact with Western medicine?  Or frustration with the circumstances which made Western medicine your only choice?  Or, as others have mentioned, limited choice of care providers due to insurance constraints?  

 

That would be more helpful, I think.

 

(oh, and kathymuggle is right - I shouldn't paint with a broad brush about MDC either!)

Last post, and then I am off for a few hours.  Cool conversation.

 

Thanks for saying I am right, btw, I do like being right (and can feel my narcissistic head growing….orngbiggrin.gif )

 

I probably do give a bit more leeway to natural health professionals (only slight, though, I thought a naturopath was out to lunch on some allergy stuff and ignored her….)

 

I can think of two reasons:

 

1.  Most non-western medicine practitioners seem to spend more time with you.  This is not across the board, but it seems to be a pattern.  As such, you feel they know you better.  They listen more, they explain more….all of it comes down to time.  

 

2.  I have seen 3 alt. practitioners in my life - midwife, naturopath, and chiropractor.  Both the midwife and chiropractor were very careful and honest in laying out what they could and could not do.  I really appreciate that. It shows me they understand the limits of their profession.  I have not had this from doctors (whom, btw, I have sen far more of in my life than alt. practitioners).  I get doctors really do treat everything, so maybe it does come up less….but a little humbleness helps *me* to build trust.  


Edited by kathymuggle - 11/29/12 at 10:15am
post #116 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

One person said that she did not believe her doctor had received much BF education, based on his erroneous statement.  

 

I don't think anyone said categorically that doctors receive no training in breastfeeding.  

 

 

I don't have time to hunt for it, but I believe I DID say that doctors receive very little (if any) BF education.

 

This statement was not based on my own bad experiences, but on the answers I got from my doctor friends, when I asked them (as a result of said bad experiences) what they were taught in med school about BF.

 

The general consensus was that they had a page or less to read about BF.  These are doctors who are in their late 30's/early 40's.  2 are pediatitions, 1 is an internist, 1 is family practice, 1 is an OB/GYN specializing in high risk pregnancies.

 

Once a woman has given birth, the OB/GYN assumes that lactation is a feeding issue, therefore the domain of the pediatrician or the family doc.  But the ped/family doc think it's the domain of the OB/GYN, because it's mama's body.  They're taught that adequate weight gain is the primary focus, and that even if "breast is best," it doesn't matter if it's breast or canned formula as long as baby is gaining adequately.  They are also taught that "many women can't produce enough milk", and that it's vitally important to be on top of this and supplement with formula as soon as there's any sign that "there's not enough milk."

 

They were NOT taught that babies marathon-nurse during growth spurts in order to increase milk production.  They were taught that if the baby needed to nurse more than every 2-3 hours, then that's a sign that baby needs formula supplementation.

 

THis isn't doctor-bashing.  This is a criticism of what doctors are taught about BF in med school, and how, and by whom.  (Hint:  the BF instruction booklets handed out in the hospital are written and produced by the formula companies.)

post #117 of 198

Just quickly, WIC did not require me to take my son to a naturpath, but did require me to take him to a doctor.  Since well checks and vaxes and seeing a doctor in the western medicine model are quasi mandatory (im getting my sons mmr at 4 so he can go to school next year), versus seeing  practitioners that are more effective in ttreating health out of the pocket extremely expensive not covered by medicaid, then, you can see why i want to hold doctors to a higher standard. I dont expect that standard to be upheld. Fortunately or me, i have the internet, and i dont depend on wic anymore.

post #118 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by contactmaya View Post

Just quickly, WIC did not require me to take my son to a naturpath, but did require me to take him to a doctor.  Since well checks and vaxes and seeing a doctor in the western medicine model are quasi mandatory (im getting my sons mmr at 4 so he can go to school next year), versus seeing  practitioners that are more effective in ttreating health out of the pocket extremely expensive not covered by medicaid, then, you can see why i want to hold doctors to a higher standard. I dont expect that standard to be upheld. Fortunately or me, i have the internet, and i dont depend on wic anymore.

How are well checks and vaxes quasi-mandatory?

post #119 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdentityCrisisMama View Post

Adequate sample size for how folks come to decisions is OT. Feel free to move that discussion to a new thread. 


Sample size seemed relevant to decision-making.  Sorry.

post #120 of 198

I've had WIC and I've never known vaxes or well checks to be mandatory. Lead tests, yes. The nurse at the health department can do that. 

 

I feel like natural medical professionals get way less flack about their mistakes and attitudes than MD's do. I love my ped and my ob, but I think my chiropractor (and honestly, all of the chiropractors Ive ever met (totalling 6) is a quack. Just my opinion. 

 

I had an ob that was terrible before, and I dumped him for this ob. I interviewed peds in depth before choosing her, and got recommendations from everyone I knew beforehand. I have medicaid, and live in a rural place, but healthcare is a huge priority for us. Im not going to see a crappy doctor just because of location- Ill make sacrifices to drive to the doctor that is on the same page with me. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Why Do People Follow Medical Authorities?