 |
 |
Could this not be seen as colluding with a falsity? I'm troubled as to why pts want a diagnosis of CF/ME as the 'classic' description and prognosis is lousy. If I accept blindly what they want, then i may well be colluding with the pt down a wrong diagnosis, medicalisation and sick role. Yes, try to deal and support pts symptoms but avoid deception+colllusion. >From: Fay Wilson <[log in to unmask]> >Reply-To: GP-UK <[log in to unmask]> >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: CFS/ME again >Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:58:07 -0000 > >From: "Paul Caldwell" <[log in to unmask] >Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 5:16 PM > > > On same pgea course got chatting to a bright young neurologist who said >that > > most neuros now feel that CFS/ME is really somatised depression. > ><snip> > > >Trouble is pts are the ones who vociferously say its purely > > physical. True CF as diagnosed by the above criteria is a rare bird >indeed. > >But does it matter? Why do we have to impose our terms on patients? What is >"true CF" anyway? Why not agree their view of their own condition if it is >possible to do so without fatally compromising our logical sense, if by >doing so we can help them get better or at least live with their >disability. >Is it not like the fable of the wind and the sun and who can get the coat >off the man's back most quickly? Why would anyone refer someone with CFS/ME >to a bright young neurologist? I hope nobody ever does that to me if I get >it. Much rather have a non-judgemental GP if there are any left by then :-) >-- >Fay _________________________________________________________________ Fast. Reliable. Get MSN 9 Dial-up - 3 months for the price of 1! (Limited-time Offer) http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/