1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 15th April 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Terminology for psychogenic nonepileptic seizures: Making the case for “functional seizures”, 2020, Asadi-Pooya et al

Discussion in 'Other psychosomatic news and research' started by Andy, Jan 28, 2020.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    21,944
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Paywall, https://www.epilepsybehavior.com/article/S1525-5050(19)31338-1/fulltext
    Sci hub, https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.yebeh.2019.106895
     
    rvallee and spinoza577 like this.
  2. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,451
    Location:
    Canada
    Right. But persuading by lying is blatantly unethical. It is not neutral, only pretends to be and with the explicit purpose of deceiving the patient. They do mean 100% psychogenic and just lie about it precisely to fool the patients into accepting something that isn't even what they mean.

    That it can be done does not remove the immorality involved here. You can convince people dying of cancer that they are dying because of their bad attitude. It does not make it true or ethical, just that you can successfully abuse the massive power imbalance of medical practice and bully sick people into reporting they believe a lie. As long as you don't frame it honestly, obviously. As we can see from reactions to those admissions, FND patients are very confused when they hear what FND proponents actually mean. So are they really convinced? Sounds more like perfidy, having someone sign a blank contract then filling it after the fact isn't acceptable in legal practice, it certainly should not be in medical practice.
    It's all about persuasion. If you claim to persuade someone that they have some vague psychological thing by telling them you mean otherwise, did you really convince them? Or did it just allow you to report a lie by lying about lying? You can get people to sign a statement that there clearly are 5 lights if you tell them that it's a typo that will be corrected later to 4.

    All this is doing is making a very strong case to make it explicitly forbidden to lie to patients, including by omission, exaggeration or using misleading rhetoric. Current practice somehow assumes no one would ever do that with malicious intent. And yet here there is this sub-field of medical practice that is essentially built on doing exactly that.

    Almost weird to add the note that this is the author's opinion. The whole field is nothing but people's personal opinions.
     
    Andy, Sean, spinoza577 and 2 others like this.

Share This Page