4 ms·

> “You all did everything you could, didn’t you?” he asked hopefully. > I wanted to tell him no. I wanted to tell him that if we had done everything we could s

> “You all did everything you could, didn’t you?” he asked hopefully. > I wanted to tell him no. I wanted to tell him that if we had done everything we could she would have ... I struggle with things like this. Its like I want to answer accurately, but then have to consciously remember the culture and consequences. Other people are so natural at this

mindslight 8y ago
> I want to answer accurately, but then have to consciously remember the culture and consequences. Other people are so natural at this (elsewhere) > I had seen this person once a month obviously deteriorating in line with what every prognosis and statistic would say... it was a spot on analysis IMHO these two are inextricably linked. Most people want to live in their own emotion-mediated reality. By not innately editing your own thoughts based on their emotional implications, you're able to arrive at more correct (but inconvenient) conclusions. But everyone else still has to take the slow road. And yes, it's very hard to get doctors to break out of that mode when communicating. The vast majority of people they see need that mode, and it's very hard to directly convey that you are non-medical but still highly technical.
- stordoff 8y ago
  It's necessary because people have very different reactions. I remember when my doctor accidentally referred to my test results as a brain tumour (rather that the less immediately concerning to the layperson benign growth or glioma). I was thinking it's a growth that hasn't changed for five years and is barely visible on a contrast MRI (small enough that one of the MRIs reported that it wasn't even there) - it's nothing to worry about, but I can could tell that my mother was panicked. You have to convey the meaning and consequences, even if it's technically slightly inaccurate or imprecise - sometimes the technically correct answer leads to the wrong interpretation (as to treatment/prognosis), in part due to the emotional baggage it carries.

mindslight 8y ago

> I want to answer accurately, but then have to consciously remember the culture and consequences. Other people are so natural at this (elsewhere) > I had seen this person once a month obviously deteriorating in line with what every prognosis and statistic would say... it was a spot on analysis IMHO these two are inextricably linked. Most people want to live in their own emotion-mediated reality. By not innately editing your own thoughts based on their emotional implications, you're able to arrive at more correct (but inconvenient) conclusions. But everyone else still has to take the slow road. And yes, it's very hard to get doctors to break out of that mode when communicating. The vast majority of people they see need that mode, and it's very hard to directly convey that you are non-medical but still highly technical.

stordoff 8y ago
It's necessary because people have very different reactions. I remember when my doctor accidentally referred to my test results as a brain tumour (rather that the less immediately concerning to the layperson benign growth or glioma). I was thinking it's a growth that hasn't changed for five years and is barely visible on a contrast MRI (small enough that one of the MRIs reported that it wasn't even there) - it's nothing to worry about, but I can could tell that my mother was panicked. You have to convey the meaning and consequences, even if it's technically slightly inaccurate or imprecise - sometimes the technically correct answer leads to the wrong interpretation (as to treatment/prognosis), in part due to the emotional baggage it carries.