So, this was going to just be a short, simple post about Dr. Nancy Snyderman getting a new show on MSNBC. Until I started reading the comments on the post I just linked to.
Two stories this week made my jaw drop:
Anyone watch this week's House? I enjoed the Rashoman-like look at what went wrong with a particular patient.
But I really didn't like the ending. In the end we discovered that the reason Dr. Chase (the callow Aussie doctor) rushed his consult with the patient and didn't ask the appropriate questions is because he just found out his father had died.
Aw, the poor little puppy. Suddenly our sympathies are meant to turn, and we're supposed to cut the guy some slack (as opposed to when the red herring false revelation was that he was hungover.)
Look, the first argument they presented was that human beings make mistakes. And I can accept that. I used to have a boss who, if you made a mistake of any kind, would ask "why did you do that?" And sometimes there just isn't an answer to the question.
It probably doesn't make the person on the receiving end of the mistake feel any better.
But I can also tell you that I wouldn't feel any better that a doctor made a fatal error over someone I love because they were upset vs. they were hungover.
And P.S.-does anyone else think it's totally unrealistic that they would take one of House's lackeys and suddenly make him the supervisor, rather than corral some other senior level doctor to do it?
Since I brought up House yesterday I might as well keep up the superficial focus on medicine a la your television and point to this column in Slate.
I don't watch Grey's Anatomy, but it sounds like it features both of the quibbles I have with House...but to a much more serious degree. Namely a) inappropriate behavior by the doctors and b) totally inaccurate portrayals of medical situations.
The article is a bit more interesting than the usual ramblings on the topic, including mine, because it covers the history of the medical profession as shown on TV. Turns out the AMA used to have significant control over how medicine was portrayed. Once they lost that all hell broke loose.
Interesting piece. Check it out.
Of course the S.O. and I have maintained our TiVO Season Pass to Fox medical drama House, and of course we continue to be completely enamored of Hugh Laurie and his performance. I think it might be time, though, to broaden or change the supporting cast. Some of them seem to have run their course.
My episode recaps and thoughts are in the extended post...
Because it's on hiatus right now, and I loves me some House.
Basically the brief piece says, yeah, it's not rally realistic, but who cares? It hearkens back to a time when doctors has the time, energy and lack of fear of malpractice issues to really investigate a case and spend quality time on it.
I just think it's good entertainment personally!
According to Kevin, MD.
This is particularly funny to me because the Significant Other and I are always commenting throughout every episode of House, "What, they don't have MRI techs to do MRIs?" Or, "What, they gotta do their own urinalysis?"
We have definitely noticed that the three cute young doctors on house seem to do very little thing themselves. And that it didn't really seem all that, how shall I say, realistic.
The again, we knew we were watching TV, so we weren't exactly looking for stark realism.
Here's a blog called Polite Dissent that does a weekly recap of "House" episodes and especially reviews the medical accuracy. Fun read, but full of spoilers. If you're a TiVo viewer who's always days behind you might not want to read these recaps until you've watched the episode.
Hat tip to Enoch for the link.