When my husband was 13 years old, his mother started experiencing erratic behavioral symptoms like extreme forgetfulness and disconnected conversations. Many doctors’ appointments later, it was determined she had a brain aneurism. As aneurisms go, it was fairly straightforward, even by the standards of 1970. Surgeons operated to close off blood vessels, and she recovered … sorta. The surgery left her with no sense of smell and a massive personality change. She was no longer the woman she was. Eventually, she and my husband’s father divorced, and custody of the children was awarded to my husband’s father. His mother died in a car crash several years later.
My husband calls his mother’s aneurism the pivotal event of his young life, sending ripples of impact throughout the rest of his personal history, as well as that of his sisters. Yet today, treating that aneurism would nearly be an outpatient procedure. Think of the changes in medicine in the 50 years since his mother’s diagnosis. Why, they were practically back in the Stone Age in 1970, just a few steps away from consulting the Four Humors.
In some ways, we’re still primitive in our understanding of medicine. Advancements are happening at such an accelerated rate that, 50 years from now, physicians and surgeons will look back at our current times and marvel at our crude techniques and treatments.
Or will they?
I just read an article that makes me think the beginning of the end of modern medicine may well be upon us. Written by Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, former associate dean of curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, the article is entitled “Take two aspirin and call me by my pronouns.”
Apparently, medicine is being invaded by social justice warriors (SJWs), a remarkable group of people who manage to destroy everything they touch. At “woke” medical schools, curricula are increasingly focused on social justice rather than treating illness. Got that? Social justice over illness.
The American College of Physicians is becoming obsessed with gun control (as if guns “cause” injury) and global weather phenomena. As Dr. Goldfarb observed, “During my term as associate dean of curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania’s medical school, I was chastised by a faculty member for not including a program on climate change in the course of study.”
I think I just heard the evil bells of doom start to clang.
“These educators focus on eliminating health disparities and ensuring that the next generation of physicians is well-equipped to deal with cultural diversity, which are worthwhile goals,” states Dr. Goldfarb. “But teaching these issues is coming at the expense of rigorous training in medical science. The prospect of this ‘new,’ politicized medical education should worry all Americans.” [Emphasis added.]
Yes, I can see it now. Some poor soul goes to the doctor with a brain aneurism, and the doctor starts quizzing the patient on his/her/zher firearms ownership and the effects of internal combustion engines on climate change. Will the doctor refuse to treat the patient unless he/she/zhe gets rid of all guns? Will the patient be required to sign a pledge to reduce his/her/zher carbon footprint after treatment?
Some might argue it’s important for doctors to address their patients by their preferred pronouns. But – if this column is right – political correctness is coming at the expense of medical knowledge. How long before we regress to Stone Age treatments but with proper pronoun usage? And since when has it been standard medical procedure to cater to a patient’s delusions?
More importantly, how long before physicians withhold treatment unless or until their patients fall in line with progressive thought and behavior?
If you think this last point is paranoid speculation, think again. That precise scenario happened in Soviet Russia, where groupthink was mandatory for decades. You agreed with the government or you were involuntarily institutionalized in mental hospitals. After all, you must be crazy if you disagree with socialism, right?
When Dr. Goldfarb wrote his editorial criticizing the direction medical schools are going, needless to say the social justice warriors – including many of his colleagues – rose up in fury to pound him into the ground, thus illustrating even doctors cannot deviate an inch from the progressive-approved leftist narrative without suffering professional consequences.
Pre-med students already undergo progressive discrimination when applying to medical school. A student added his observations to an article entitled “Ideologically Weaponizing MDs for Culture War” in the American Conservative: “Recently, a publication in a high-profile bioethics journal suggested that medical students should be weeded out during interviews if they are opposed to performing abortion, euthanasia, or contraception. Anecdotally, I know that many of my Catholic and Christian peers are afraid of leaving any identifying information on their applications for fear of discrimination. … [T]he advice from anyone in the system is if they think you are religious they will actively prevent you from getting a seat [in medical school]. [A]s someone who has gone through the interview process, I can say that they will ask questions which will pick out those of a non-SJW persuasion. I can’t reveal specifics due to a non-disclosure agreement, but I can say that at my most recent interview, one question focused on a very recent, hot button SJW type social issue, and the other looked at religious health-care practitioners in a potentially very critical way. I can’t say for sure whether they were looking to push an SJW agenda there, but it was certainly my impression. … Oppression, privilege and the whole range of buzz words are a frequent discussion topic. For some of the students, the problem isn’t the SJW instructor but the fact that the instructors don’t go far enough.”
Instead of the Four Humors, future doctors may be focusing on the Four Genders. Or Forty Genders. Or for that matter, Four Hundred Genders (or other trendy claims). Meanwhile, patients with brain aneurisms will search in vain for a surgeon who doesn’t care what gender they are or what pronoun they prefer, but instead can dig into a brain without causing additional damage.
Weaponizing medicine is a truly dangerous thing. But what happens when medicine knowledge itself reverses because its proponents are blinded by their social justice goals?
“If this country needs more gun control and climate change activists, medical schools are not the right place to produce them,” concludes Goldfarb.
Too late, I fear.
