Ed. note. The Observer has felt remiss that he has been unable to weigh in on the current tabloid speculation regarding Jen and whomever, or even Paris Hilton. It is so hard to do analysis in the checkout line. So, I have offered this short article instead.)
Recently at a local meeting, the word "equity" was used so often that it brought back memories of contract law----yes, there are actions on the contract and then actions on the basis of "equity." It has been a long time. Too bad that "Ambulance" has been silenced. Ah, the good old days when a wild and crazy discussion was possible. But---I digress. The word "equity" brought back memories of a time some thirty years ago when I thought I had driven the stake in the heart of one foolish theory---the theory of "love equity." Maybe you have heard of this theory.
As a young married man, one of my friends who was the first of the guys to get married, was watching Monday night football with me, when he went over the fact that because he had gotten married first.....and since all the younger guys seemed to be reveling in the new morality, that....well...he felt that he had been cheated out of his just due...... his "love equity". It just was not "fair."
The more he discussed his "love inequity," the more he seemed to become agitated. So....I let him talk...and talk...and talk...till the first half of football had ended. The Vikings were winning so I thought I could proceed with some friendly advice.
I then gently asked him whether he thought maybe the stories of his peer group might be exaggerated concerning their exploits or let's just say the large amount of "love equity" that they were experiencing. He said he had never thought of the possibility. I asked him to consider that sometimes guys did exaggerate. The thought shocked him.
Now that I had gotten his attention, I simply asserted that I knew that his wife did love him and that to run around on her would be a foolish mistake. Now that he had two kids, things had changed. Love had matured...hopefully. It was not like the movies.
Thirdly, I mentioned that he might benefit from some counseling----I always thought it prudent to recommend counseling for those who had feelings of "love equity deficit."
Thus, recently I have heard some weird "equity" analysis regarding the 5K controversy-----Is it possible to do a broad based diversity analysis on a sample of 12 vs. a sample of 1200 and reach any conclusion at all? Can folks who give not a wit about tolerance or diversity be suddenly concerned about "inequity." Can folks who sacrifice for their children be spun to be "rich" and not worthy of access to public education that fits their child's educational need?
For me----- It is about choice. I believe parents can make the choice which is best for their child.
For those who believe that the taxpayer should pay for the "level playing field" encompasing every perceived matter than one can be subject to inequity------------I say to them the same thing I told the confused fellow during Monday night football.
Counseling.
Posted by Evansville Observer at 8:02 AM
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Sunday, October 1, 2006
Wellness: Illness: The Politics of Sacrcity: On Ivan Illich
I told the story recently about out patient surgery, and the revolution that I witnessed in Minneapolis some thirty years ago as one innovative administrator disregarded the spreadsheets and focused on the mission of health--care, and not the mission of sickness care.
The reflection on that last point---wellness vs. sickness was the result of a study group among the administrative team. Our young intern at that time was Mark Stolpman, who I believe was a grad student from a univesity in DC and was reading the works of Ivan Illich. One of his first books was called "Medical Nemisis." The date of this story is 1976. Seems like just yesterday for me.
The thesis of the book was that we have become as a society obsessed with "illness" care and not "health" care. We are treated as patients only when the problem has resulted in an illness and can be treated with some surgery or pharmacy, and not earlier when it would have been more productive. The true healer is one who treats the patient far earlier, and far more inexpensively.
Well----this was a hospital. With doctors who made their living treating sickness. And paid very well for it. Imagine their enthusiasm on hearing that some adminstrators were reading such revolutionary books filled with such threatening ideas.
Mark Stolpman, after reading and sharing the book "Medical Nemisis" with us, made a recommendation that we as a hospital begin a "wellness program." It would be the first in the state. You can imagine the reception of the doctors. They moved in executive committee to have Mark fired. Sound familiar?
The head adminstrator intervened. He said that wellness would be no threat and that if the medical staff would have some patience with the idea, it would prove otherwise in short order. Again he was proved right. Soon all the hospitals began wellness programs. They became the hot "in" health program. Our hospital became a leader in "wellness" as well as "outpatient surgery."
Growing out of the wellness movement, were such things as the running craze, 5k fun runs, fitness centers, HMO care, and much, much more. Yes, before 1977 folks were active but they never were "totally buff" like they are today. Just kidding.
At the very center of this idea is the idea of SCARCITY vs. Plenty. The traditional notion of health care was that sickness care was expensive and scarce, and it had to be fought over. Ivan Illich goes over in his book that this is focusing on the wrong thing---focusing on the hole and not the donut. By focusing on the wellness and plenty of life and enabling the patient of all ages to begin a program of healthy living, one could transform the very nature of life to a higher level.
So---when you think HMO care or running or the fitness craze...Think of the father of these, who was Ivan Illich.
Oh, by the way----he also wrote a book called "DeSchooling." I bet you can guess what that is about. More on that later.
The reflection on that last point---wellness vs. sickness was the result of a study group among the administrative team. Our young intern at that time was Mark Stolpman, who I believe was a grad student from a univesity in DC and was reading the works of Ivan Illich. One of his first books was called "Medical Nemisis." The date of this story is 1976. Seems like just yesterday for me.
The thesis of the book was that we have become as a society obsessed with "illness" care and not "health" care. We are treated as patients only when the problem has resulted in an illness and can be treated with some surgery or pharmacy, and not earlier when it would have been more productive. The true healer is one who treats the patient far earlier, and far more inexpensively.
Well----this was a hospital. With doctors who made their living treating sickness. And paid very well for it. Imagine their enthusiasm on hearing that some adminstrators were reading such revolutionary books filled with such threatening ideas.
Mark Stolpman, after reading and sharing the book "Medical Nemisis" with us, made a recommendation that we as a hospital begin a "wellness program." It would be the first in the state. You can imagine the reception of the doctors. They moved in executive committee to have Mark fired. Sound familiar?
The head adminstrator intervened. He said that wellness would be no threat and that if the medical staff would have some patience with the idea, it would prove otherwise in short order. Again he was proved right. Soon all the hospitals began wellness programs. They became the hot "in" health program. Our hospital became a leader in "wellness" as well as "outpatient surgery."
Growing out of the wellness movement, were such things as the running craze, 5k fun runs, fitness centers, HMO care, and much, much more. Yes, before 1977 folks were active but they never were "totally buff" like they are today. Just kidding.
At the very center of this idea is the idea of SCARCITY vs. Plenty. The traditional notion of health care was that sickness care was expensive and scarce, and it had to be fought over. Ivan Illich goes over in his book that this is focusing on the wrong thing---focusing on the hole and not the donut. By focusing on the wellness and plenty of life and enabling the patient of all ages to begin a program of healthy living, one could transform the very nature of life to a higher level.
So---when you think HMO care or running or the fitness craze...Think of the father of these, who was Ivan Illich.
Oh, by the way----he also wrote a book called "DeSchooling." I bet you can guess what that is about. More on that later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)