This article called "Chronically Ill May Be Happier If They Give up Hope" is about just that: People who are chronically ill might be happier to just give up hope all together and accept whatever problem they have completely. Recent studies show that people feel more at ease and relaxed when they do this if they are chronically ill vs them having hhope that might turn out to be false.
The author is trying to say that people that are chronically ill might be happier if they give up hope all together. "Hopeful messages may not be in the best interests of the patient and may interfere with the patient's emotional adaptation," Ubel says. The adaptation that might be going on is them adapting to understand that they are ill. This shows that the author is trying to say that someone that gets hopeful message might have a hard time accepting their illness, which is an important part of healing in itself. An experiment was done to test this, and it showed that the group that was given false hope "contrasted their current life with the life they hoped to lead, and didn't make the best of their current situation." This shows that people that are given hope will often not live in the now and will only see what they want to see. This clearly is not good, especially if a person does build up hope only to find out that their condition worsens. "Loewenstein said these results also may explain why people who lose a spouse to death often recover better emotionally over time than those who get divorced."This would be because people that are heartbroken over divorce may have the hope of getting back together but someone that loses a partner knows that they will never be together again, forcing them to move on. This is why I think the author believes that people that are chronically ill might be happier if they give up hope all together.
I personally believe that this makes a lot of sense and that I wouldn't be surprised if this turned out to be true. I think I would personally react better to being Chronically Ill if I wasn't given hope by the doctor, but just the statistics and my chances of getting better. That way, if my chances aren't looking good, I would force myself to move on and accept it. I can hope for the best, but I would have to be prepared for the worst, and that is how a lot of people are. I don't think that people can specifically just categorize 8 billion people though and say that doctors should completely stop giving hopes to patients, because while some people would do better without hope, some people wouldn't be able to function without that little piece of hope. If I were a doctor though, I would tell the patient the honest circumstances, I wouldn't try to sugarcoat it at all.
The author is trying to say that people that are chronically ill might be happier if they give up hope all together. "Hopeful messages may not be in the best interests of the patient and may interfere with the patient's emotional adaptation," Ubel says. The adaptation that might be going on is them adapting to understand that they are ill. This shows that the author is trying to say that someone that gets hopeful message might have a hard time accepting their illness, which is an important part of healing in itself. An experiment was done to test this, and it showed that the group that was given false hope "contrasted their current life with the life they hoped to lead, and didn't make the best of their current situation." This shows that people that are given hope will often not live in the now and will only see what they want to see. This clearly is not good, especially if a person does build up hope only to find out that their condition worsens. "Loewenstein said these results also may explain why people who lose a spouse to death often recover better emotionally over time than those who get divorced."This would be because people that are heartbroken over divorce may have the hope of getting back together but someone that loses a partner knows that they will never be together again, forcing them to move on. This is why I think the author believes that people that are chronically ill might be happier if they give up hope all together.
I personally believe that this makes a lot of sense and that I wouldn't be surprised if this turned out to be true. I think I would personally react better to being Chronically Ill if I wasn't given hope by the doctor, but just the statistics and my chances of getting better. That way, if my chances aren't looking good, I would force myself to move on and accept it. I can hope for the best, but I would have to be prepared for the worst, and that is how a lot of people are. I don't think that people can specifically just categorize 8 billion people though and say that doctors should completely stop giving hopes to patients, because while some people would do better without hope, some people wouldn't be able to function without that little piece of hope. If I were a doctor though, I would tell the patient the honest circumstances, I wouldn't try to sugarcoat it at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment