You have to remember that unless the HCP uses insulin, they basically haven't clue they go by the book, end of story. Their book say's if you do A then B will happen, unfortunately your body hasn't read the book, which means it's all your fault when things do not go by the book.Or am I wrong, and the HCPs actually are blaming those of us who are "poorly controlled" for being the cause of our own misfortune?
I guess it turns on whether "poorly controlled" is a statement of the outcome, or a statement of blame. It's not crystal clear.
With the best will in the world, we can only do our best to manage our diabetes. Taking into account all the factors that influence blood sugar readings it could be classed as a miracle to get it right all the time.The other side in this litigation are arguing that "poorly controlled" means it's his fault, under his control, his failure, and therefore they shouldn't have to account for his state of health.
So, I know this guy, he's a T1, involved in some unpleasant litigation. His health is a material issue in this litigation. He has a letter from his hospital consultant stating he is poorly controlled, and advising what some of the implications of this fact are for current and future health.
The other side in this litigation are arguing that "poorly controlled" means it's his fault, under his control, his failure, and therefore they shouldn't have to account for his state of health.
Now you and I know that "poorly controlled" means "he's doing his best with the tools he's got, but he's just not succeeding, like very many other diabetics who don't manage to succeed with the tools we give them - no blame is attached".
However, given how the general public might interpret the phrase "poorly controlled", maybe it's time for a change of terminology from our dear Health Care Professionals?
Or am I wrong, and the HCPs actually are blaming those of us who are "poorly controlled" for being the cause of our own misfortune?
So, I know this guy, he's a T1, involved in some unpleasant litigation. His health is a material issue in this litigation. He has a letter from his hospital consultant stating he is poorly controlled, and advising what some of the implications of this fact are for current and future health.
The other side in this litigation are arguing that "poorly controlled" means it's his fault, under his control, his failure, and therefore they shouldn't have to account for his state of health.
Now you and I know that "poorly controlled" means "he's doing his best with the tools he's got, but he's just not succeeding, like very many other diabetics who don't manage to succeed with the tools we give them - no blame is attached".
However, given how the general public might interpret the phrase "poorly controlled", maybe it's time for a change of terminology from our dear Health Care Professionals?
Or am I wrong, and the HCPs actually are blaming those of us who are "poorly controlled" for being the cause of our own misfortune?
I don't think the term "poorly controlled" is a statement of blame at all.
How else would you want it to be described?
How can it be describe in a way that someone won't interpret it offensively?
Brittle diabetes? at least its then blaming the diabetes rather than the person?
But I still don't see why "poorly controlled" has to mean you are blaming the person?
When my control has been bad and the consultant has said to me it's "poorly controlled" I've said "yes you're right and I would like to look at ways to get it much better"
I haven't said "so you're saying this is all my fault?"
Then your very lucky as I've always had it said with a sneer and "you really should try you know." (direct quote)
I guess many diabetics would see it as a statement of blame. If it is hard work to keep BG levels somewhere in a sensible range and therefore keep going, what might be an objective statement becomes a very perjorative one.I don't think the term "poorly controlled" is a statement of blame at all.
But you can't apply personal experience from one consultant to everything.
I'm just being objective and saying that "poorly controlled" in the sense of this thread is not necessarily being used as a way of blame.
Luck has nothing to do with it, I take people's words for what they are and if I know that the "poor control" isn't directly or all my fault, then I'm not going to be offended by it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?