Re: [Fwd: Psychometric Instruments Help Measure AA Process...

[Guest guest]

If I can trust my recollection, all your points are correct.

Except in my case, once when I had morphine in the first few days

after surgery I had terrifying dreams, and I was told this was a side

effect of morphine. I don't know if that's true, or just an old

wives' tale to keep people from requesting morphine, or maybe just my

reaction to morphine. But I was unhappy enough never to want it

again.

I think it's a great step forward that the JCAHO has stated that level

of pain is one of the vital signs. After all, if someone's in great

pain it affects other areas of the body, and also the mind. People

who are adequately medicated for pain recover more quickly, and if

they are terminally ill, why should we officiously care if they are

addicted? I know that during my eight or twelve week recovery from

surgery, our pharmacist at one time told my husband that I had about

reached the limits of the fairly mild, but nevertheless prescription,

painkiller that I could take without becoming addicted. I never

became addicted, I never even wanted the stuff after I didn't need it.

There is something about the juxtaposition of pain and a narcotic

that doesn't make it very desirable. I have also had Dilaudid for

pain, and while it's a wonderful pain reliever, I have never had any

desire to take it if not in extreme pain. I think all this stuff is

greatly overblown.

Here's a horror story for you. Another surgeon told me that a patient

of his had metastasis to the liver of the cancer he had operated on,

and that her life expectancy then could be no more than two years.

When she was still alive after two years, he cut off her pain

medication -- completely!

> > I don't believe alcohol is well-accepted. They keep lowering the

> > acceptable BAC for driving, wine at business lunches is no longer

> > acceptable, the drinking age was raised from 18 to 21, and Snuffy

> > no longer operates a still. As I get older, alcohol becomes

> > less and less tolerated.

>

> Hmmm, interesting points. I do see a trend there.

>

> Yet, I can still go into the liquor store and pretty much buy as

much

> booze as I want. If I have it in my house, no one will view me as a

> criminal. During Prohibition this would not have been the case. I

> think attitudes and cultural images do change over time with regard

to

> this issue.

>

> A long time ago I did some research on heroin and I would have to

find

> my sources to have the exact thing again, but what I remember is

that

> heroin was first hailed as the cure for morphine addiction. (duh!

)

> Some major drug mfgr produced it, I want to say " Bayer " but I

really

> can't be sure.

>

> Also a long time ago, morphine was used to treat (successfully!)

> alcohol addiction. What doctors found was that when people took a

> measured dose of morphine daily they tended to stay away from

alcohol

> quite well. The " high " it produces is not as unpredictable as

> alcohol's high and there was much less violence associated with it.

> Ahhh, the good old days!

>

> Somewhere along the line, puritans or some such, managed to change

the

> view of these drugs to the negative images that we were taught.

They

> also got the law on their side and made these substances illegal.

> Along the way they marginalized the people who used them. Part of

it

> was out and out racism against the Chinese people who used opium and

> the association with that.

>

> I guess my whole point here is that perceptions of these things have

> changed drastically over the years. Morphine and narcotics are

GREAT

> drugs! They ease pain with very little side effects. I found it

> really interesting that recently JCAHO (Joint Commission for

> Accredidation of Health Care Organizations) has made pain relief a

> *vital sign.* This is the agency that accredits hospitals and other

> health care providers. Accredidation is a " voluntary " procedure,

but

> try getting paid by an insurance company without it.

>

> People have been undermedicated for pain for years and years in

> medical settings because of the stigma of drug addiction. That is

> *starting* to change. This JCAHO thing is going to make a big

> difference in it.

>

> I don't know if I said it on here before, but I worked as a support

> person for a hospice team. Many of our patients were in a great

deal

> of pain before they died. Morphine helped those people. There were

> still a few people who refused " drugs " until the very end. Surely

> that is their decision, but I felt it showed strongly how negative

the

> perception about narcotics is.

>

> When I was giving birth to my daughter, a scheduled c-section, the

> anesthesiologist had a button on his lab coat: NO PAIN. Thank-you!

>

> I also remember a time when I was having migraine after migraine,

just

> clusters, and I was so brainwashed by AA that I wouldn't accept a

> little shot of demerol that my MD offered. I was so fearful that it

> would take me right back, I just suffered instead. Go figure.

>

> I see that I am rambling...oh well!

> See you,

>

[Guest guest]

> Here's a horror story for you. Another surgeon told me that a

patient

> of his had metastasis to the liver of the cancer he had operated on,

> and that her life expectancy then could be no more than two years.

> When she was still alive after two years, he cut off her pain

> medication -- completely!

I sure hope she changed doctors! What a *%$#* jerk.

[Guest guest]

> Here's a horror story for you. Another surgeon told me that a

patient

> of his had metastasis to the liver of the cancer he had operated on,

> and that her life expectancy then could be no more than two years.

> When she was still alive after two years, he cut off her pain

> medication -- completely!

I sure hope she changed doctors! What a *%$#* jerk.

[Guest guest]

> Here's a horror story for you. Another surgeon told me that a

patient

> of his had metastasis to the liver of the cancer he had operated on,

> and that her life expectancy then could be no more than two years.

> When she was still alive after two years, he cut off her pain

> medication -- completely!

I sure hope she changed doctors! What a *%$#* jerk.

[Guest guest]

I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors were severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

As far as I know, doctors still *are severely punished for this. As you probably know, given one of the areas of law in which you've practiced, in many states, including NY, doctors must fill certain scrips out in triplicate, so one copy can go to the state agency that monitors their prescribing habits. In other states there are other sorts of monitoring mechanisms.

I recall reading an article five years ago or so, I believe it was in REASON magazine, about an ex-cop who had been injured in an automobile accident and was left in intractable, unremitting pain. His own physician would not prescribe a suffcient dosage of the medication that gave him relief and the ability to be up and about, so he, like many others, went to a Virginia doctor who was willing to prescribe proper levels of pain meds to anyone who could demonstrate they had a bona fide illness or injury.

Well, the licensing people in Virginia eventually decided enough good doctoring was enough, and sought to pull his license. Dozens of grateful patients poured out for the hearing. I do not recall what the outcome was, but he did stop treating the ex-cop. That poor man ended up seeing Kevorkian, and is therefore no longer in any pain.

--Mona--

[Guest guest]

I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors were

severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

> > Here's a horror story for you. Another surgeon told me that a

> patient

> > of his had metastasis to the liver of the cancer he had operated

on,

> > and that her life expectancy then could be no more than two years.

> > When she was still alive after two years, he cut off her pain

> > medication -- completely!

>

> I sure hope she changed doctors! What a *%$#* jerk.

>

>

[Guest guest]

I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors were

severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

> > Here's a horror story for you. Another surgeon told me that a

> patient

> > of his had metastasis to the liver of the cancer he had operated

on,

> > and that her life expectancy then could be no more than two years.

> > When she was still alive after two years, he cut off her pain

> > medication -- completely!

>

> I sure hope she changed doctors! What a *%$#* jerk.

>

>

[Guest guest]

I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors were

severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

> > Here's a horror story for you. Another surgeon told me that a

> patient

> > of his had metastasis to the liver of the cancer he had operated

on,

> > and that her life expectancy then could be no more than two years.

> > When she was still alive after two years, he cut off her pain

> > medication -- completely!

>

> I sure hope she changed doctors! What a *%$#* jerk.

>

>

[Guest guest]

To the best of my knowledge, doctors in this state are now encouraged

to treat pain aggressively as long as addiction does not result. I

realize that's kind of a fuzzy way of looking at things, but the

licensing board does acknowledge that physical dependence does not

equal addiction. Unfortunately when I tried to pull up the

administrative code just now it was incomplete, so I don't know

exactly what the regs say.

> In a message dated 4/19/01 8:38:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> kayleighs@m... writes:

>

>

> > I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors

were

> > severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

> >

>

> As far as I know, doctors still *are severely punished for this. As

you

> probably know, given one of the areas of law in which you've

practiced, in

> many states, including NY, doctors must fill certain scrips out in

> triplicate, so one copy can go to the state agency that monitors

their

> prescribing habits. In other states there are other sorts of

monitoring

> mechanisms.

>

> I recall reading an article five years ago or so, I believe it was

in REASON

> magazine, about an ex-cop who had been injured in an automobile

accident and

> was left in intractable, unremitting pain. His own physician would

not

> prescribe a suffcient dosage of the medication that gave him relief

and the

> ability to be up and about, so he, like many others, went to a

Virginia

> doctor who was willing to prescribe proper levels of pain meds to

anyone who

> could demonstrate they had a bona fide illness or injury.

>

> Well, the licensing people in Virginia eventually decided enough

good

> doctoring was enough, and sought to pull his license. Dozens of

grateful

> patients poured out for the hearing. I do not recall what the

outcome was,

> but he did stop treating the ex-cop. That poor man ended up seeing

> Kevorkian, and is therefore no longer in any pain.

>

> --Mona--

[Guest guest]

To the best of my knowledge, doctors in this state are now encouraged

to treat pain aggressively as long as addiction does not result. I

realize that's kind of a fuzzy way of looking at things, but the

licensing board does acknowledge that physical dependence does not

equal addiction. Unfortunately when I tried to pull up the

administrative code just now it was incomplete, so I don't know

exactly what the regs say.

> In a message dated 4/19/01 8:38:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> kayleighs@m... writes:

>

>

> > I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors

were

> > severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

> >

>

> As far as I know, doctors still *are severely punished for this. As

you

> probably know, given one of the areas of law in which you've

practiced, in

> many states, including NY, doctors must fill certain scrips out in

> triplicate, so one copy can go to the state agency that monitors

their

> prescribing habits. In other states there are other sorts of

monitoring

> mechanisms.

>

> I recall reading an article five years ago or so, I believe it was

in REASON

> magazine, about an ex-cop who had been injured in an automobile

accident and

> was left in intractable, unremitting pain. His own physician would

not

> prescribe a suffcient dosage of the medication that gave him relief

and the

> ability to be up and about, so he, like many others, went to a

Virginia

> doctor who was willing to prescribe proper levels of pain meds to

anyone who

> could demonstrate they had a bona fide illness or injury.

>

> Well, the licensing people in Virginia eventually decided enough

good

> doctoring was enough, and sought to pull his license. Dozens of

grateful

> patients poured out for the hearing. I do not recall what the

outcome was,

> but he did stop treating the ex-cop. That poor man ended up seeing

> Kevorkian, and is therefore no longer in any pain.

>

> --Mona--

[Guest guest]

> > In a message dated 4/19/01 8:38:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> > kayleighs@m... writes:

> >

> >

> > > I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors

> were

> > > severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

> > >

> >

> > As far as I know, doctors still *are severely punished for this. As

> you

> > probably know, given one of the areas of law in which you've

> practiced, in

> > many states, including NY, doctors must fill certain scrips out in

> > triplicate, so one copy can go to the state agency that monitors

> their

> > prescribing habits. In other states there are other sorts of

> monitoring

> > mechanisms.

> >

> > I recall reading an article five years ago or so, I believe it was

> in REASON

> > magazine, about an ex-cop who had been injured in an automobile

> accident and

> > was left in intractable, unremitting pain. His own physician would

> not

> > prescribe a suffcient dosage of the medication that gave him relief

> and the

> > ability to be up and about, so he, like many others, went to a

> Virginia

> > doctor who was willing to prescribe proper levels of pain meds to

> anyone who

> > could demonstrate they had a bona fide illness or injury.

> >

> > Well, the licensing people in Virginia eventually decided enough

> good

> > doctoring was enough, and sought to pull his license. Dozens of

> grateful

> > patients poured out for the hearing. I do not recall what the

> outcome was,

> > but he did stop treating the ex-cop. That poor man ended up seeing

> > Kevorkian, and is therefore no longer in any pain.

> >

> > --Mona--

[Guest guest]

> > In a message dated 4/19/01 8:38:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> > kayleighs@m... writes:

> >

> >

> > > I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors

> were

> > > severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

> > >

> >

> > As far as I know, doctors still *are severely punished for this. As

> you

> > probably know, given one of the areas of law in which you've

> practiced, in

> > many states, including NY, doctors must fill certain scrips out in

> > triplicate, so one copy can go to the state agency that monitors

> their

> > prescribing habits. In other states there are other sorts of

> monitoring

> > mechanisms.

> >

> > I recall reading an article five years ago or so, I believe it was

> in REASON

> > magazine, about an ex-cop who had been injured in an automobile

> accident and

> > was left in intractable, unremitting pain. His own physician would

> not

> > prescribe a suffcient dosage of the medication that gave him relief

> and the

> > ability to be up and about, so he, like many others, went to a

> Virginia

> > doctor who was willing to prescribe proper levels of pain meds to

> anyone who

> > could demonstrate they had a bona fide illness or injury.

> >

> > Well, the licensing people in Virginia eventually decided enough

> good

> > doctoring was enough, and sought to pull his license. Dozens of

> grateful

> > patients poured out for the hearing. I do not recall what the

> outcome was,

> > but he did stop treating the ex-cop. That poor man ended up seeing

> > Kevorkian, and is therefore no longer in any pain.

> >

> > --Mona--

[Guest guest]

> > In a message dated 4/19/01 8:38:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> > kayleighs@m... writes:

> >

> >

> > > I don't know what she did. This was some years ago, when doctors

> were

> > > severely punished for prescribing pain meds beyond a certain term.

> > >

> >

> > As far as I know, doctors still *are severely punished for this. As

> you

> > probably know, given one of the areas of law in which you've

> practiced, in

> > many states, including NY, doctors must fill certain scrips out in

> > triplicate, so one copy can go to the state agency that monitors

> their

> > prescribing habits. In other states there are other sorts of

> monitoring

> > mechanisms.

> >

> > I recall reading an article five years ago or so, I believe it was

> in REASON

> > magazine, about an ex-cop who had been injured in an automobile

> accident and

> > was left in intractable, unremitting pain. His own physician would

> not

> > prescribe a suffcient dosage of the medication that gave him relief

> and the

> > ability to be up and about, so he, like many others, went to a

> Virginia

> > doctor who was willing to prescribe proper levels of pain meds to

> anyone who

> > could demonstrate they had a bona fide illness or injury.

> >

> > Well, the licensing people in Virginia eventually decided enough

> good

> > doctoring was enough, and sought to pull his license. Dozens of

> grateful

> > patients poured out for the hearing. I do not recall what the

> outcome was,

> > but he did stop treating the ex-cop. That poor man ended up seeing

> > Kevorkian, and is therefore no longer in any pain.

> >

> > --Mona--

[Guest guest]

> Somewhere along the line, puritans or some such, managed to change the > view of these drugs to the negative images that we were taught. They > also got the law on their side and made these substances illegal. > Along the way they marginalized the people who used them. Part of it > was out and out racism against the Chinese people who used opium and > the association with that.

, I think what happened was that people who used opium stopped working, whereas people who drank still worked. In some ways it helped them stick at otherwise intolerable conditions. They remained economically useable. Capitalism in harness with Protestantism. A powerful combination.

>

[Guest guest]

> Somewhere along the line, puritans or some such, managed to change the > view of these drugs to the negative images that we were taught. They > also got the law on their side and made these substances illegal. > Along the way they marginalized the people who used them. Part of it > was out and out racism against the Chinese people who used opium and > the association with that.

, I think what happened was that people who used opium stopped working, whereas people who drank still worked. In some ways it helped them stick at otherwise intolerable conditions. They remained economically useable. Capitalism in harness with Protestantism. A powerful combination.

>

[Guest guest]

> Somewhere along the line, puritans or some such, managed to change the > view of these drugs to the negative images that we were taught. They > also got the law on their side and made these substances illegal. > Along the way they marginalized the people who used them. Part of it > was out and out racism against the Chinese people who used opium and > the association with that.

, I think what happened was that people who used opium stopped working, whereas people who drank still worked. In some ways it helped them stick at otherwise intolerable conditions. They remained economically useable. Capitalism in harness with Protestantism. A powerful combination.

>

[Guest guest]

> > Somewhere along the line, puritans or some such, managed to change

> the

> > view of these drugs to the negative images that we were taught.

> They

> > also got the law on their side and made these substances illegal.

> > Along the way they marginalized the people who used them. Part of

> it

> > was out and out racism against the Chinese people who used opium

and

> > the association with that.

>

>

> , I think what happened was that people who used opium stopped

working,

> whereas people who drank still worked. In some ways it helped them

stick at

> otherwise intolerable conditions. They remained economically

useable.

> Capitalism in harness with Protestantism. A powerful combination.

>

>

Hi ,

I disagree but do not have my source handy, so will need to address

this more fully later. I do remember that opium was used in many of

the patent medicines of the day, and tinctures such as laudanum which

" respectable " women could use without the stigma attached to alcohol.

>

>

> >

[Guest guest]

> > Somewhere along the line, puritans or some such, managed to change

> the

> > view of these drugs to the negative images that we were taught.

> They

> > also got the law on their side and made these substances illegal.

> > Along the way they marginalized the people who used them. Part of

> it

> > was out and out racism against the Chinese people who used opium

and

> > the association with that.

>

>

> , I think what happened was that people who used opium stopped

working,

> whereas people who drank still worked. In some ways it helped them

stick at

> otherwise intolerable conditions. They remained economically

useable.

> Capitalism in harness with Protestantism. A powerful combination.

>

>

Hi ,

I disagree but do not have my source handy, so will need to address

this more fully later. I do remember that opium was used in many of

the patent medicines of the day, and tinctures such as laudanum which

" respectable " women could use without the stigma attached to alcohol.

>

>

> >

[Guest guest]

> > Somewhere along the line, puritans or some such, managed to change

> the

> > view of these drugs to the negative images that we were taught.

> They

> > also got the law on their side and made these substances illegal.

> > Along the way they marginalized the people who used them. Part of

> it

> > was out and out racism against the Chinese people who used opium

and

> > the association with that.

>

>

> , I think what happened was that people who used opium stopped

working,

> whereas people who drank still worked. In some ways it helped them

stick at

> otherwise intolerable conditions. They remained economically

useable.

> Capitalism in harness with Protestantism. A powerful combination.

>

>

Hi ,

I disagree but do not have my source handy, so will need to address

this more fully later. I do remember that opium was used in many of

the patent medicines of the day, and tinctures such as laudanum which

" respectable " women could use without the stigma attached to alcohol.

>

>

> >