The New Yorker, Article: Memoirs of Disease and Disbelief, May 2018

Indigophoton

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
The article mentions, Jen Brea, Julie Rehmeyer and Maya Dusenberry.
Porochista Khakpour’s deliberately unheroic “Sick” raises questions about what we expect of female patients with chronic illness.

Is Lyme disease a feminist issue? It may sound ludicrous to ask this of a tick-borne infection that can usually be dispatched with a course of antibiotics. Yet its name commemorates the two women living in the town of Lyme, Connecticut, who, in the mid-seventies, fought the medical establishment to have the disease acknowledged and treated. “You know,” a doctor informed one of them after failing to find the source of her symptoms, “sometimes people subconsciously want to be sick.” It’s tempting to think of this reflexive, paternalistic skepticism directed at female patients as a remnant of a bygone era. And yet there’s a class of illnesses—multi-symptomatic, chronic, hard to diagnose—that remain associated with suffering women and disbelieving experts. Lyme disease, symptoms of which can afflict patients years after the initial tick bite, appears to be one.

“I don’t care if people don’t think feminism is important, because I know it is,” the musician and early Riot Grrrl Kathleen Hanna says toward the end of “The Punk Singer,” Sini Anderson’s 2013 documentary about her. “And I don’t care if people don’t think late-stage Lyme disease exists, because I have it and other people have it. . . . If they don’t want to believe in it or they don’t want to care about it, that’s totally fine, but they should have to stay out of my way.” She describes an experience common to many sufferers from chronic illness—that of being dismissed as an unreliable witness to what is happening inside her. Since no single medical condition, a doctor once told her, could plausibly affect so many different systems—neurological, respiratory, gastrointestinal—she must be having a panic attack.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/06/04/memoirs-of-disease-and-disbelief/
 
I think one needs to be careful in framing illnesses within 'social justice' rhetoric. Surely there are fine points to be made but overplaying it will alienate a lot of people.

"Autoimmunity is a feminist issue" = now Republicans hate everything that would help people with autoimmune diseases.
"Autoimmunity causes suffering and prevents people from fully contributing to society, we should invest in finding treatments blah blah" = now it's a win-win. Feminists can still be just as interested, can't they?

With ME/CFS specifically I think it's plain to see that the medical community is equal-opportunity bad with male and female patients. Yes there are more women than men but nobody 'did' that. We all get the same crap. Certainly specific aspects of how it's been dealt with by governments and health systems can be usefully understood through political-economic analysis; it's important to be precise, I think.

What about Gulf War Illness? Male soldiers... just as not-solved as ME/CFS, still labeled as mass hysteria by familiar chumps.

Anyway, I always brought my Mom to appointments I was trying to get something out of. Nobody messes with an indignant mother.
 
"Autoimmunity is a feminist issue" = now Republicans hate everything that would help people with autoimmune diseases.
The alternative is worse. If you try to appease them then they see it as a weakness they can exploit very successfully, the only things good enough to actually appease them is to adopt their views and vote for their candidates.
They already think the middle class does not deserve healthcare so trying to avoid triggering them is a fools errand.
 
Wow, yes, great review. I was surprised by its thoroughness.

I did wonder what the author meant by this:
psychiatrists lack the incentive that other physicians have to treat their field as a dumping ground for irritating women and their unidentifiable problems.

I am quite brain dead today so could someone please Dumbsplain if I missed something.
 
I think one needs to be careful in framing illnesses within 'social justice' rhetoric. Surely there are fine points to be made but overplaying it will alienate a lot of people.

"Autoimmunity is a feminist issue" = now Republicans hate everything that would help people with autoimmune diseases.
"Autoimmunity causes suffering and prevents people from fully contributing to society, we should invest in finding treatments blah blah" = now it's a win-win. Feminists can still be just as interested, can't they?

With ME/CFS specifically I think it's plain to see that the medical community is equal-opportunity bad with male and female patients. Yes there are more women than men but nobody 'did' that. We all get the same crap. Certainly specific aspects of how it's been dealt with by governments and health systems can be usefully understood through political-economic analysis; it's important to be precise, I think.

What about Gulf War Illness? Male soldiers... just as not-solved as ME/CFS, still labeled as mass hysteria by familiar chumps.

Anyway, I always brought my Mom to appointments I was trying to get something out of. Nobody messes with an indignant mother.

The thing is though, women are treated worse then men by healthcare systems. This has been shown clearly.

The other point you mention about it turning certain people off the issue because of using the term feminist etc, well...of course, yes that’s true.

But the whole point is that it can also be used to build allies who do subscribe to those views. And given that women generally get the worse deal, framing it as a feminist issue is more likely to garner support from (healthy) allies. *And* men will benefit from this too.
 
I am quite brain dead today so could someone please Dumbsplain if I missed something.

My interpretation was that, as psychs are supposedly the end of the line in diagnosis,they have no one else to dump patients the patients they can't help onto.

If that is the correct interpretation of what was meant, it's hard to know where to start putting them straight. :confused:
 
Wow, yes, great review. I was surprised by its thoroughness.

I did wonder what the author meant by this:


I am quite brain dead today so could someone please Dumbsplain if I missed something.

I interpreted it to mean that psychiatry is the dumping ground for diseases other clinicians don't understand. But many times when the patient 'arrives' at psychiatry, disheartened and beaten down, the psychiatrist will be the one to say, "I don't know what you have, but you don't belong here with me." In parts of the world where ME is not knee-jerk assumed to be a psychiatric problem, this does happen. I've heard more than one story that goes like that.
 
But many times when the patient 'arrives' at psychiatry, disheartened and beaten down, the psychiatrist will be the one to say, "I don't know what you have, but you don't belong here with me."
What can happen is that psychiatry will say "We don't know what you have" and "we can't help you". While medical doctors will attribute any reported symptoms to your being a "psych" patient. Patients can get stuck in medical limbo, where neither doctors nor psychiatrists will try to help them or investigate further.
 
Back
Top Bottom