|
April 28th, 2007. In response to
Hurwitz Jurors Explain Their Verdict -
John Tierney; TierneyLab; 2007-04-30.
What should society
do when a properly licensed liquor store owner provides alcohol to an adult
alcoholic, whether intoxicated at the time of purchase or not, who then
drives down the roadway killing himself and innocent motorists and
destroying property? What about an adult who is not alcoholic but exhibiting
poor judgment by purchasing a fifth of Everclear (Pure Grain alcohol), 190
proof, and drinking the entire bottle, later passing away from alcohol
poisoning? Who should be criminally prosecuted? Who should have his or her
license pulled?
What about the store owner who is duly licensed to sell tobacco to adults?
What if he or she sells cigarettes, whether filtered or non filtered, to an
adult who has emphysema, asthma or lung cancer who will go about smoking and
later die from tobacco abuse. What about children who are exposed to
second-hand smoke and have their risk of lung cancer doubled in the process?
Who is criminally prosecuted in these matters? What about the damage to
society, families and individuals on an annual basis because of the evil
business owners that sell these products? They are presumably blinded solely
by profit thus throwing caution to the wind, are they not? Aren’t they
“pushing” these products without regard to the safety of others. They often
do so in “massive” quantities if you consider grams of alcohol or ounces of
tobacco.
Now remove store owner, tobacco, alcohol, alcoholism, emphysema, asthma and
cancer from the above and substitute physicians, opioids and chronic,
non-cancer pain. I understand that opioids require a prescription where
alcohol and tobacco don’t, but they are all regulated by the FDA as well as
the states. Which are more devastating to society, families and individuals?
Which are more “addictive” or “dangerous”? Which ones generate more wealth
it for the business owner and revenue for the government?
You know, when you think about it, you don’t see FDA agents, or any other
federal agents, standing between the adult customer and the
convenience-store “pusher” of alcohol and tobacco thus “protecting the
public interest” or serving justice. They do like to put pictures of the
food pyramid in there though. Or is that the USDA? It really only matters
that we know what is fat free!! Speaking of fat free, when will doughnuts be
made a controlled substance? They are highly addictive you know. I would be
willing to bet that cigarettes and doughnuts are responsible for more
emergency room visits and deaths than opioids anyway.
Arguing that somehow physicians are responsible for the prescription abuse
problem in this country is intellectually dishonest. Those who state that
the pain relievers prescribed by physicians are so highly addictive and
dangerous that there should be criminal prosecutions for overuse or abuse,
when carefully compared to the consequences of alcohol and tobacco on our
society, are exactly backwards!!
Opioid use/abuse is a public health issue, not a federal criminal justice
issue. Enforcement of the CSA needs better guidance from Congress and the
Secretary of HHS to be sure. Maybe other government agencies would know
better how to proceed if this guidance were given (I doubt it but one can
hope). A larger issue, though, is federalism. The states have historically
regulated physicians, not the Federal Government.
The actual size and reach of the Federal Government should be of concern to
us all. When it is allowed to be inserted into the exam room between a
doctor and his or her patient, it’s way too ‘big brotherly” for me. This
seems even more communist than the days of Stalin. Can anyone find any
examples of a communist country inserting itself into specific prescribing
decisions in this manner? Maybe they do or have before and I’m just not
aware. Do we want to be like that?
Many thanks to John Tierney for his work on this topic and hosting this
forum. - Posted by Dr.Bill
April 28th, 2007. In response to
Hurwitz Jurors Explain Their Verdict -
John Tierney; TierneyLab; 2007-04-30.
April 24th, 2007. In response to
What's an Ethical Doctor to Do?
- John
Tierney; TierneyLab; 2007-04-23.
This article brought
back a lot of memories of the four years I spent trying to get my doctors to
believe I was in severe pain while being told I was "drug seeking" or that
my pain was "psychological". Not until I had an endometrioma (a benign
tumor-like growth) obstruct both ureters (requiring major surgery each time
to un-obstruct this tube which leads from the kidney to the bladder) six
months apart did my doctor finally believe me and apologize. Even in spite
of these surgeries, I've lived the past several years in severe and
unrelenting pain.
How sad that a truly caring and ethical doctor who went above and beyond;
providing free care to his patients who didn't have insurance and caring for
those who no-one else would help, is being villified. His trial is a sad
commentary on American physician's and their undertreatment of pain, as well
as the US government's short-sightedness in failing to help truly empathic
physicians' give the best possible care.
I am grateful there are physicians out there who are still willing to risk
their livelihood in order to help persons who have no-one else to turn to.
I'm especially grateful I was able to find a few of these kind, empathic and
believing physicians before I was driven to suicide. During those four long
years I came very close to taking this route, spending seven weeks in a
mental hospital! The worst of it was, after being told so many times I was
"just drug-seeking" or "the pain is all in your head", I began to believe
it! Finding these pain specialists saved my life. I pray other physicians
will find the courage to stand for what is right and continue the fight
against chronic pain.
I know my experience in living this fight has made me a better nurse. Yet
the ongoing battle of convincing my primary doctor and others that I'm truly
in pain has exhausted me. I can no longer work as a nurse because though the
pain medication I am prescribed has helped, I still have too much pain to be
able to lift patients or stand on my feet for hours at a time, as well as
other nursing duties. The job I believe God called me to do, in order to
help those less fortunate than me, is one I can no longer do. But still,
though I sorrow over this, I'm grateful for the help I've been given. -
Posted by Debbie, RN
April 28th, 2007. In response to
Hurwitz Jurors Explain Their Verdict -
John Tierney; TierneyLab; 2007-04-30.
I don’t understand how a jury of lay
people can make a decision that a doctor has prescribed medication outside
the bounds of medical practice.
I don’t understand how a juror (let
alone 12 of them) can make a decision based on a “gut” feeling about a law
he/she didn’t understand and send a man to jail (potentially) for 20+ years.
Thank you, Mr. Tierney, for your
coverage of this very serious, and sad case. - Posted by Jack
Hildebrand, M.D.
[END] |