I have a bone to pick. Actually, several bones. Several of my bones. Several aching junctions between my bones.
To have a disease with visible effects is, at least in Ashland OR, to invite comment. Much of it well-intended on the surface, but as often as not, more about the advice-giver’s self-image than any understanding of the disorder.
Usually I take this in stride. I respond with the statement, “Well, there are about 120 kinds of arthritis." Then follow by asking whether the advice they are relating, the herb they are praising, the non-licensed practitioner they recommend, has an applicability to psoriatic arthritis. This is usually followed by a blank look and that’s the end of it.
But if someone persists, it’s a good indication of several things:
1> The exchange is no longer about my condition.
2> That the advice giver feels their beliefs are at stake.
3> That those beliefs are especially important to the advice giver, because—to be brutally honest about it—they think those beliefs somehow make them superior (most often more enlightened) than their foil. A foil which in this case, is me.
So now we get to the beliefs. As a general rule, the more convinced a white person on the West Coast of the US is that their beliefs are progressive and enlightened, the more likely they are to be dated, hackneyed monuments to self-congratulation.
Two common, but hardly exhaustive, examples:
1> It’s reasonable enough to assume there is a link between mind and body, spiritual and physical health. But more often than not, I run into an attitude, a cruel insinuation, that the body’s health is simply a function of one’s spiritual health.
In short, that sick people are sick because of a spiritual failing, that a physical sickness is a symptom of an underling moral sickness. Now this isn’t just cruel; it is a belief that is—literally and simply—medieval.
What is the spiritual failing most often in play? The failure to be “open minded” about an approach an advice-giver has strong beliefs about. In other words, a lack of faith in another person’s beliefs about a non-medical approach to an illness. There is a name for this kind of belief system: faith healing. Structurally, the belief system is no different than that of a backwoods snake handler. The terms have been changed, but the game is the same. Conveniently for the holder of such beliefs, the house always wins.
2> It’s reasonable to take note of the numerous problems with our medical system, from the way doctors are trained to the obscene profits of health insurers. It’s reasonable enough to explore alternative approaches to treating problems.
But when someone advocates for a particular approach or practitioner, I often ask myself a question: who gets sued when there's a mistake? Whatever their shortcomings, doctors are structurally accountable: to lawsuits and medical boards. These aren’t perfect structures, but the principle, that there is a structure in place to ensure consequences, is important. Not just on a person-to-person level, but wider protections and lasting consequences: public structures of accountability.
So much of alternative medicine comes down to an injunction: “trust me.” Trust me, and if you don’t, well then on some level, you deserve to suffer. Be a vigilant, informed advocate against the medical system, but never, in any case, demand that I, an alternative practitioner, be accountable in a systematic way. To even suggest such a thing shows a lack of trust on your part. If you were more trusting of the right people, you wouldn’t be so sick.
Yeah, being around this kind of energy makes me sick alright.
