mylatulipp wrote:

> I am a new member of the group

Hi Michel and welcome. I'm flattered that you chose my mail to introduce
yourself.

In my message that you quoted I was assuming that we have to define
disease in order to define medicine. Of late I'm beginning to wonder
whether perhaps the whole effort to define either is futile.

Even though he takes the position that mental illness does not exist,
Dr. Szasz does not oppose psychiatry as long as it is voluntary. He
points out that nowadays law and psychiatry are so intertwined that
there is no longer such a thing as truly voluntary psychiatry.

In my opinion the same holds true for somatic medicine. Disease/illness
has burgeoned from a lay term with us since the dawn of language to
describe disabling discomfort, into a legal term the parameters of which
are set by legislators, insurers, injury lawyers and others. Truly
voluntary relations between physician and patient do not exist anywhere
in the industrialized world, because all such relations are governed by
the state.

I imagine hundreds of years ago, when a person felt unwell, he or his
family consulted (if anyone) whomever he believed could help him remedy
his unwellness and restore his sense of wellbeing. One party offered his
knowledge and services, the other party paid for them or, in the case of
a charity case, at least demonstrated gratitude and reverence. The
parties did not need definitions. The very need to define is a sign that
we maintain these relations in an atmosphere of oppression.

Stay with us,
Mira