dear all,

I've been following this conversation and enjoying it very much. Thanks to
everyone for contributing important bits and pieces. What struck me recently
is that in talking about what words to use, or how we define ourselves, what
we are REALLY talking about is our relationship with the patient/client. What
I am sensing is that Wiliam and others want to or already have established a
different kind of relationship with their patients than is commonly seen in
conventional medicine.

The Doctor/Patient relationship is a topic I've spent a lot of time thinking
about and discussing in our phiosophy club at NCNM. It seems to me a topic
that is one of the most important for a naturopathic physician and yet one
that receives little "work" in the education i have received thus far.
Different
doctors will choose to work with patients in different ways but I hope that we
can all agree that illness almost always has at its root a spirtual/emotional
component. So far in my clinical experience (albeit limited) I see that as
Naturopaths we carry the same fear/ignorance of the emotions that we see in
conventional medicine. A patient will begin to express emotions that are
central to the case (in my opinion) and we either roll over them without any
acknowledgement, or we otherwise disrupt the flow of energy coming from
the patient. We fail to make contact with the patient to reach them in a real
way and let them know that we are here and listening to them. It seems to
me that even though our relationship with the patient has a Natural structure,
it is the ability to LISTEN that really differentiates us. This ability to
listen
creates a feeling of shared energy with the patient that is essential it seems.

In listening we can find the thread of the case that leads us closer to the
cause, the root of illness in its multidimensionality. To listen as a physician
I
think it is true that we must maintain our own identity and not meld into
"best friends" as Dr. Morstein says, and also to allow healing to happen
through us (the vis) as Dr. Zeff says.

I guess what I'm saying is that within this discussion of words what we are
really talking about is relationship. and the question i put forth is: What
qualities and characteristics should our relationships have to allow medicine
to work best?

Luke, NCNM
---NDPhilosophy@yahoogroups.com wrote ---
> Hello, all,
>
> I don't think we can rely solely on semantics to define if we have or
> haven't established a partnership with our patients. In my private
> practice in Montana, I was Dr. Mona and folks were my patients, but
> down here, due to me being part of the SCNM it morphed into Dr.
> Morstein, although in my own private practice, some folks call me
> "Mona" or "Dr. Mona" and it's all the same to me. However, they are
> still my "patients". The energy and flow and experience WITH my
> patients has never changed although the terminology of my name did.
>
> I don't really believe that patients wish to be fully on an equal
> status with their physician. Illness and sickness are scary; people
> oftentimes come to us already having been sick for years and having
> failed to recover on numerous treatment plans, both allopathic and at
> times alternative. I think having a slightly vertical relationship is
> invaluable, as they are looking for me to find the obstacle to cure, to
> direct them to medical tests, dietary regimens, efficacious
> supplementation. Heck, that's what they are paying me for! They WANT
> direction; the NEED direction. I myself didn't want a "best friend"
> when I sought medical care; I wanted someone who knew what they were
> doing, what I needed to do, and directed me to achieve those goals.
> Patients need someone confident to know what is going on and tell them
> how they can get better. We don't want them to turn over all their
> power to us, true, but we need them to trust us enough to do the tests
> we suggest, and follow our educated and experienced advice.
>
> The partnership is formed throughout the doctor/patient relationship in
> many ways outside of semantics, and whether someone is Dr. Kim or Dr.
> Morstein, or you are working with a "partner" or a "patient" shouldn't
> matter one tiny bit. The partnership is based on treating patients
> with respect; basing a therapeutic regimen particularly on Docere, so
> all aspects of it are fully explained to the patient's understanding,
> giving them time to ask clarifying questions if necessary; engaging in
> compromise with the patient though not to the extent the therapy will
> no longer be effective (for example, if a food allergy test comes back
> exhibiting leaky gut and the patient is reactive to 40 foods, obviously
> it makes no sense to remove to demand the patient remove all those
> foods from their diet--can the patient remove the top three, perhaps
> while we heal up the gut?); working effectively within the patient's
> financial capabilities; understanding their struggles to make change
> and supporting them on their journey no matter how fast or slow their
> commitment to heal is going; and so forth.
>
> We shouldn't get too caught up in whether we are Dr. First Name or Dr.
> Last Name. In my experience, it doesn't matter, except to the doctor.
> We should simply ensure we are good doctors, and treat patients with
> respect, integrity and compassion, that we act decisively and strive to
> have patients follow our knowledgeable directions, but we can
> compromise and be supportive. That will ensure the partnership
> develops. Semantics is always less important that the actual human
> interaction.
>
> Mona Morstein, ND
> Mesa, AZ
>
>
--- End of quote ---