Response by a psychologist.

Response by Philip Hickey / December 5 2013:

"I find myself torn on this issue.  On the one hand, I respect completely each individual’s right to ingest whatever he/she chooses.  I’ve written on this subject here.  I’m not advocating the use of drugs.  They’re destructive of organs and of relationships.  This is true of street drugs and pharmaceutical products.  But if people choose to use them, I don’t think we have the right to stop them. ... 

"What I struggle with, however, is the notion of medical practitioners being involved in the distribution process.

Obviously I exclude from these considerations situations in which these drugs are being used in a genuinely medical context.  There are various medical procedures, for instance, in which an anxiolytic can make things a great deal easier for everybody, and obviously this is, and should be, a matter for the physician to decide in consultation with the patient.

But situations which do not involve a genuine medical issue are, in my view, more problematic.  My primary concern is that regardless of what the physician says, the fact that the drug is being prescribed by a medical practitioner will inevitably communicate the notion that somehow it is a medicine, and that the problem is medical in nature.  I can also readily imagine that psychiatrists would – again inevitably – begin to truncate the caveats, and in some cases might dispense with them altogether."

Read the rest of Dr. Hickey's piece for his careful thoughts. 

 
 
Immediately related elementsHow this works
-
ISPS-US Moving Forward Map »ISPS-US Moving Forward Map
Helping People »Helping People
Existing experiences »Existing experiences
People who are uncomfortable with MPAPT. »People who are uncomfortable with MPAPT.
Pathways from MPAPT. »Pathways from MPAPT.
Proposal (4): The "drug-centred" model »Proposal (4): The "drug-centred" model
Response by a psychologist.
+Komentarai (0)
+Citavimą (0)
+About