Comments on: Does mastectomy equal selfectomy? http://bioblog.biotunes.org/bioblog/2008/12/17/does-mastectomy-equal-selfectomy-part-i/ Biology News Biology Blog Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:11:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Shlog Blogger http://bioblog.biotunes.org/bioblog/2008/12/17/does-mastectomy-equal-selfectomy-part-i/#comment-127 Shlog Blogger Fri, 06 Feb 2009 14:40:00 +0000 http://bioblog.biotunes.org/bioblog/?p=112#comment-127 Mrs C-<br/><br/>I'm assuming you think that all doctors are male as you refer to the uncaring physician in your little vignette as "he". Now isn't THAT interesting? Why that default? <br/><br/>"we treat illness, not people" - what utter rubbish! <br/><br/>You also probably believe that "illnesses don't kill people- PEOPLE kill people"???<br/><br/><br/>Dr ShlogBlog Mrs C-

I’m assuming you think that all doctors are male as you refer to the uncaring physician in your little vignette as “he”. Now isn’t THAT interesting? Why that default?

“we treat illness, not people” – what utter rubbish!

You also probably believe that “illnesses don’t kill people- PEOPLE kill people”???

Dr ShlogBlog

]]> By: Mrs. Charlottesvillian http://bioblog.biotunes.org/bioblog/2008/12/17/does-mastectomy-equal-selfectomy-part-i/#comment-125 Mrs. Charlottesvillian Fri, 02 Jan 2009 06:55:00 +0000 http://bioblog.biotunes.org/bioblog/?p=112#comment-125 For better or worse, breasts have a position in Western society not held by gall bladders. An article I read recently about cancer said that many women who survive chemo say that the most traumatic part is losing their hair. Hair and breasts are both indicia of femininity, broadly speaking (no pun intended), here and elsewhere. This obviously means very different things to different women -- depending on psychic investment in their physical looks, life experiences, age, and family circumstances, among other factors.<br/><br/>So, here is the thought experiment: If a young woman is diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer who is unmarried and hopes to survive this current illness and go on to someday have children (and possibly breast feed them) -- and, ok, throw in that she is only orgasmic through nipple stimulation :-) -- should her mere "feelings" about her breasts and what she would like to use them for in the future factor into a treatment decision? <br/><br/>If 'yes' for her, what doctor wants to draw the line and assume that the woman sitting before him is "clearly" (based on his limited knowledge of her -- he is her surgeon or oncologist, not her therapist!) -- 'done' with her breasts.<br/><br/>But, again, this points to a failure with our current medical configuration -- insofar as we treat illness, not people. If doctors knew more about their patients, they might have an ability to have a more nuanced conversation with them that would lead to a better decision for the individual in these (and other) cases. (Nuanced conversation, of course, not necessarily being a highly-enough valued medical skill.) For better or worse, breasts have a position in Western society not held by gall bladders. An article I read recently about cancer said that many women who survive chemo say that the most traumatic part is losing their hair. Hair and breasts are both indicia of femininity, broadly speaking (no pun intended), here and elsewhere. This obviously means very different things to different women — depending on psychic investment in their physical looks, life experiences, age, and family circumstances, among other factors.

So, here is the thought experiment: If a young woman is diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer who is unmarried and hopes to survive this current illness and go on to someday have children (and possibly breast feed them) — and, ok, throw in that she is only orgasmic through nipple stimulation :-) — should her mere “feelings” about her breasts and what she would like to use them for in the future factor into a treatment decision?

If ‘yes’ for her, what doctor wants to draw the line and assume that the woman sitting before him is “clearly” (based on his limited knowledge of her — he is her surgeon or oncologist, not her therapist!) — ‘done’ with her breasts.

But, again, this points to a failure with our current medical configuration — insofar as we treat illness, not people. If doctors knew more about their patients, they might have an ability to have a more nuanced conversation with them that would lead to a better decision for the individual in these (and other) cases. (Nuanced conversation, of course, not necessarily being a highly-enough valued medical skill.)

]]>