Contact
There is an understanding between patient and provider that is often overlooked, and normally not discussed that can become a source of frustration for both. Sometimes, people seeking to protect themselves do so by finding fault in others. What we've begun to realize however, is that problems are more frequently identified by an awareness of the problem within oneself than they are determined to be in the world. So problems perceived to be real exist because the person who identifies them has full knowledge of the manifestation within him, or herself.
Whether by written plan, dialog, discussion, or non-verbal communication a patient/provider relationship ought to be a dialectic, not a dictation - especially if the conditions identified prove to be 'hopeless', or untreatable, such as various forms of addictions. And in order to determine what to do about the problem, or what would be helpful, the patient needs to be trusted with the information he or she brings to the provider, including what he, or she knows to be true about the condition being described.
Then, by relying upon what the patient has to say about him or herself, what might be considered a hopeless condition may actually be treated by faith in the process, rather than delayed by the opinion of a profession that needs to leverage the history of their practice to remain profitable. We have to admit, that to consent to treatment for a hopeless condition is to admit to being incompetent; that by doing so, a provider has created an opportunity to plan for treatments that suit his or her own taste, or preference rather than the needs of the patient, who the doctor has determined to be hopeless by virtue of the consent.[i]
To continue to distract a patient from the treatment of a condition he or she complained about by treating other conditions may be a form of fraud, or an indication of greed, and once the labels have been applied, it becomes very difficult to fight. It is the use of a standard practice that the community relies upon to approve and reintegrate a person who has been 'treated'. And persons who do not comply with the prescribed forms of treatment are not accepted back into the community because the standard practice has not been fulfilled. So when the physician finally does comply with the original request, it's not in the interest of the patient anymore, but out of a duty to meet with the expectations of the community.
And may no longer the will of a patient to work with the healthcare system to achieve his or her goals because the perception of the problem has become an evil distraction that cost him his life.To continue to distract a patient from the treatment of a condition he or she complained about by treating other conditions may be a form of fraud, or an indication of greed, and once the labels have been applied, it becomes very difficult to fight. It is the use of a standard practice that the community relies upon to approve and reintegrate a person who has been 'treated'. And persons who do not comply with the prescribed forms of treatment are not accepted back into the community because the standard practice has not been fulfilled. So when the physician finally does comply with the original request, it's not in the interest of the patient anymore, but out of a duty to meet with the expectations of the community. And it's no longer the will of the patient to work with the health care system to achieve his or her goal because the perception of the problem became an evil distraction that cost him most of his life.
With boundaries established by consent (Please see: Medical Model), there is no discussion about the adequacy or inadequacy of evaluation or treatment. [ii] Everything has either already been determined, or you've agreed to the standard practice approved by community licensure. The judgment of an injured party, or provider is irrelevant. Licensed Practitioners, and Judges are equally qualified to determine a person’s capacity to consent and Character reference supports both determinations, but ultimately it’s faith in the practitioner that heals and the power of the Court to make a judgment.
Practices supported by faith or tradition that have outlived their usefulness that are perceived to be mutilations can be called out by the outrage of the uninitiated so our evolutionary path can be returned to the adaptation life has successfully employed for 3.5 billion years. And complementary, or alternative practitioners, fully capable of treating the conditions that result from our arrogance, will continue to treat the reactionary male to make their lives more comfortable and meaningful by their own means.
Most of our information has been challenged during this transition, so those who grew up reading textbooks have been thrown by radical changes like these. Scripture in particular has proven to be very difficult to accept; most of us believe in a loving God today, not an angry and jealous one, but we admit he needs help. It isn't sane to portray our Creator as one who would curse us even if it was only a misunderstanding (Genesis 6). I accept and see through the revisions of my work as well and have made it possible for ongoing corrections to be made by providing HTML translations for work that was edited and refereed at MEP Publications, not only to make it intelligible to all other computer platforms, but also to make it possible for the authors to revise their own work if necessary.
Treatment Planning may be determined by the direction of the World Health Organization as well, but by setting a standard practice for us all, we're overlooking the Doctor/Patient relationship and the need for adaptations that are based upon location and accessibility. Overcoming thousands of years of meddling won't be easy, but we cannot put the bullet back in the gun. It's already been fired and seems to be ricocheting around in our heads. So we're working on treatment plans that will work in our regions with accessible practitioners to achieve the acceptance of our community [iv]. We don't have to violate the rules or expectations of others. We're simply seeking the provider's consent. And if the provider doesn't consent to our plan, then we can legitimately seek a referral or alternative. Please see Aspirations for more information about Complementary and Alternative Medicine as defined by the University of Lancashire.
Create a list of do-able steps. A great example of baby-steps was created by The Founders of the 12-Step Program. (Please see: Step Primer.) The Program Founders were a part of a Christian Fellowship known as the Oxford Group, and their radical 6-Step Program must have seemed daunting to early sobriety, so rather than doing Restitution in one step, they broke it down into two:
And each step can become more carefully planned by listing different categories of the same:
More preparations for making amends are here:
The point is, to write a plan in doable steps we can accomplish. See also: Problem Solving Training
1. The Trusteeship, Bodywork 2014 - 2023: Treating a condition at the source of the injury rather than discussing beliefs about it.
2. The Trusteeship, Medical Model 2014 - 2023: The Medical Model (Describing the hopelessness of treating addictions of any kind)
3. The Trusteeship, Transpositions 2015 - 2023: Establishing limits on evaluations and dependency.
4. The Trusteeship, Aspirations 2014 - 2023: A patient has the right to seek an alternative provider, a second opinion, or legal advocacy, etc.
© The Trusteeship, 1996-2024 (IMID) | All Rights Reserved.
Site Map | Privacy Policy