The secularization of Medicine

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Sunday, November 1. 2009

The secularization of Medicine

Is Medicine still a vocation, or has it become a technical service industry?

In my view, the Internists, Family Practioners, and Psychiatrists are maintaining the core of the medical priesthood. Many other devoted docs as well.

Posted by Dr. Joy Bliss in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 16:38 | Comments (14) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Its a business vocation. My wife, a D.O., despairs sometimes at the direction medicine is going and hopes to exit the profession if it becomes worse. It may become a technical service industry with the mainstay provided by nurse practitioners and other midlevel providers.

#1 Doug on 2009-11-01 17:27 (Reply)

"Internists, Family Practioners, and Psychiatrists"

...one of these things doesn't belong here,
one of these things isn't the same...

and wtf is with the "priesthood"? OK, maybe for one out of three, but for the other two, Science or Not science?

#2 KRW on 2009-11-01 18:04 (Reply)

KRW. I swannnnn.... It's a trick observation. But you won. It's like those tests that offer three things and you have to pick the one that doesn't belong.

Where are OB/GYN, surgeons, researchers, opthamologists, bone specialists, witch doctors, oncologists.... etcetera.

Psychiatrists: Priests of Pride, M.D.
`

#2.1 Meta on 2009-11-01 19:48 (Reply)

"Swannn"? Swans don't quack.

#2.1.1 KRW on 2009-11-01 19:59 (Reply)

Southern expression. I used it on purpose because I knew you'd quack.

HAHAHAHAHA......
`

#2.1.1.1 Meta on 2009-11-01 20:40 (Reply)

BTW, not to be petty (OK, but turnaround is fair play in my book) it's "Practitioners" not "Practioners". Or have I just blasphemed?

OK, truth be told the spell checker caught it, not me. But I did catch the spell checker.

#3 KRW on 2009-11-01 18:08 (Reply)

First off, I read Doug's comment as "other medieval providers". That behind me...

This 'priesthood', what the hell is that? I've always thought of my docs as being technical service. They know science that I don't, that's why I go see them.

#4 Luther on 2009-11-01 20:40 (Reply)

Reads like being "technical" ranks somewhere below the "priesthood". Betcha $5 the doctor wont come out and play. It's been my observation that BD, Gwynnie, The Barrister, News Junkie, Bruce, etc. (sorry if I missed someone) will defend their assertions to some degree. DJB, rarely. And on the few occasions, will not stay engaged.

#4.1 KRW on 2009-11-01 20:51 (Reply)

Will not come out and play. Remember the post our priest did about patients showing up for an initial consultation and then not returning for a second visit? They are the losers, the irresponsible, the ones who will never get their lives together.... on and on she went in manner hardly befitting a Priest of Psychiatry.

It never dawned on her that the patient may not have liked her.
`

#4.1.1 Meta on 2009-11-01 21:06 (Reply)

The last post about the "high standards" of the profession, describing the board certification process was creepy enough without this priest thing. I wanted to ask if this board-certified shrink (I checked it out and called the board myself...she's also a 9/11 conspiracy nut) was an example of their high standards, or if somehow just this one slipped through.

And Luther opens another can of worms below.

#4.1.1.1 KRW on 2009-11-01 21:26 (Reply)

Hate to admit it, but I just noticed the title of this post:

The secularization of Medicine - Maggie's Farm

secular |?seky?l?r|
adjective
1 denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis : secular buildings | secular moral theory. Contrasted with sacred .
2 Christian Church (of clergy) not subject to or bound by religious rule; not belonging to or living in a monastic or other order. Contrasted with regular .

So, does the Priest want to turn medicine into religion? I don't get it. Why secularization? Medicine is science - therefore, secular. Can you imagine a doctor or Priest of Psychiatry refusing to see you if you're a non-believer?

I'm off. This is sick stuff.
`

#4.1.1.1.1 Meta on 2009-11-01 21:51 (Reply)

In my college electrical engineering classes I remember only two other students who actually used their spare time to build circuits. These two were actually interested in electronics, and came to university to study engineering because they thought it more efficient than teaching themselves. They also thought that the credential might open doors to get them a job where they could do what they had been doing anyway, but for pay.
I asked some of the others why they had chosen EE, and they told me it was because of the job prospects and income potential -- they had looked at placement rates for the various disciplines, and decided (late '80's) that engineering was the best choice for their program of study.
I think the word priesthood above is not meant to bring in any suggestion of the supernatural, but to lament that in the past many if not most who became doctors did so because of a calling -- a strong desire to help others. This would be in contrast to careerism/the desire to benefit ones own economic and social status.
Not that social status is a bad thing, and if we really want quality care we should hope that those caring for us are paid better than the average thespian.

#4.1.1.1.1.1 Douglas2 on 2009-11-05 18:29 (Reply)

'Technical' are us Proles who didn't go to that college that Mr. B. didn't want us to attend. You know, the ones who if we didn't show up to work someday the world would come to a sudden screeching halt.

Been to a few parties with doc's in attendance. Wife is a nurse you know. Doc's are always fascinated by the fact that complex airplanes are very similar to complex bodies. And that we both use similar techniques in diagnosing problems and solutions.

#4.1.2 Luther on 2009-11-01 21:08 (Reply)

I liked to think of my days as a healthcare worker as being skilled service moved by a moral commitment to my patients' well being and sustained by my salary, not as working for my salary. But being an ordinary sort, I needed (still do need) the salary so I could do what I would otherwise do for free. By God's grace or a lucky throw or good choices, I have spent most of my adult life earning a living by doing what I wanted to do anyway. Some are as fortunate as me that way, many much less so.

#5 Geoff on 2009-11-02 15:24 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Sunday, November 1. 2009

The secularization of Medicine