Hobo
If you have a lump why even have it removed if you do not want it biopsied ? Why not just let it alone ? That way you will have charge over your body and not try to compromise a physician 's care . I can understand your feelings because I've spent years with patients like you ( I'm a retired RN) . They refuse I.V.'s that are for safety issues . They complain about everything . Most of the time they have fear and control issues and all they are doing is hurting themselves . Medical care is not an easy job . We work long hours and we regularly work through the night to help people not because of huge wages so give us the respect that we deserve . Question us , yes but do not demand .
I mean no insult, but your karma just ran over my dogma. I have seen the hospital too many times and my philosophy on health care has developed after years of bad experiences - from paying high insurance premiums to being pushed into medical decisions that I regretted afterwards. I also have lived mostly in Indonesia for the past 10 years, so I have also seen a lot of instances of "alternative health care" - both good and bad.
You state:
If you have a lump why even have it removed if you do not want it biopsied? Why not just let it alone? That way you will have charge over your body and not try to compromise a physician 's care.
The answer to your questions are "because I choose to have the lump removed, and but do not choose to have it biopsied". As a medical professional you certainly have the right to ask, "Do you know the implications of not having a lump biopsied?"... but you do not have the right to question my personal decisions regarding my own body.
But, just so you understand my logic, I will tell you my rationale. First my family has a history of developing benign tumors, sometimes on my neck (where I shave), and sometimes on my hands or other places where they can become irritated.
Second, because of the high cost, I choose not to carry Part B Medicare insurance which covers doctor's visits. Plus, I do not want to pay the $100-$200 for a biopsy.
Third, if the tumor happens to be malignant, removing the tumor will solve the problem. If the tumor is thought to have metastasized, I would be in for a long series of tests and possible operations to cut out lymph nodes, etc. In addition, chemotherapy and radiation treatments would be required to hopefully cure the cancer.
At my age, I choose not to undergo the pain, suffering and expense of that procedure. The chances of the cancer re-occurring are good, and I know that death from some cause is somewhere on the horizon. With each passing year, the usual aches and pains of old age are beginning to appear. In short, my quality of life will (I hope) slowly deteriorate and eventually I will die from some cause.
I have seen too many older people suffer tremendously for many years before they finally die - I consider that absolutely inhumane medical treatment and refuse to go down that path. So if cancer is the way I am destine to die, then let the process begin. As I said previously, when I reach the point of no return, I will end of a slow, debilitating process of death by cancer with suicide.
Finally, let me say a few words about the rest of your post...
I am frankly amazed by your feelings that you have the right to dominate a patient. In your opinion, at what point does a patient give up his/her rights to choose what will happen to his body?
"They refuse I.V.'s that are for safety issues" - Doesn't the patient have the right to accept or deny a procedure given for the patient's "safety"?
This is the attitude of medical professionals that bother me the most - "I will determine what is right and wrong, good or bad for you. I am a trained professional and you and your desires mean nothing. You are a mass of human protoplasm under my control." If this were an issue of precautionary measures to prevent a malpractice suit, I could understand. The country is in dire need of tort reform.
But, no, you have a real feeling of domination – and complete disdain for patients who object. Plus, it sounds to me like the management of the place of your employment may be failing to properly schedule and hire the correct number of staff. No employee should be so overworked that he/she feels so overwhelmed and under appreciated that it reflects in the quality of work.
Once again I see some real fundamental flaws emerging in our existing health care system. I have seen them developing over the past few decades. The patients are not happy with the cost, and the health professionals are not happy with their working conditions. Before we allow the government to take over the system, I sincerely believe we need a health national debate on what is really wrong with our health care system.
I can honestly say the health care system in Indonesia is in far better condition than the system in the US. For one thing malpractice lawsuits are unheard of. For another, the country has a multi-tiered nursing program which cranks out a lot of nurses aids with 3 years training after high school. They take much of the workload of mundane tasks from the better-trained staff. Also, the technology is not as sophisticated so the staff seems to be under far less stress. Perhaps we should be looking more closely at how other countries deal with health care.
