HW#25

Through Sicko, the main problems in our society such as lack of insurance and a working healthcare system are demonstrated as being destructive to the community around the person who is sick as well as themselves because of their inability to better themselves as a result of the limited care that very little United States citizens are given. Using several Americans and American families as examples to show the negative impact of denial of coverage is the most powerful way that I felt I could get across the depressing nature of these stories that are only a handful from the hundreds of thousands of American people that must go through this because they have a government and healthcare system that still believes in only maximizing profit instead of providing equal and high-quality care for all.

        Actually hearing someone say that we are one of the only countries that still has a healthcare system based on maximizing profit instead of saving lives, put into perspective what our lives mean to these people that we depend on to make our lives better. Because of this, I feel that a socialist healthcare system is a viable but should be treated more like a step in the right direction. As I heard more about our Health care providers “scandals” I realized that the only examples Mr. Moore gave were of people who are American citizens and have been denied coverage for whatever reason as well as the occasional exception such as the girl who got the hearing aid implants as a result of a threat to expose the company for what they have done.

         Why are there no examples of families such as my own that consist of two parents who are immigrants and have received fairly good healthcare throughout their lives in the states without so much as having to pay a co payment for a bill. Not only because my parents were not born here but also because of are exceptional treatment, I am driven to ask why Mr. Moore did not add examples such as these that are a sort of counter evidence to his argument that “all” Americans live terrible lives filled with debt and sadness.

HW#24

Jamaica Kincaid, My Brother, FSG, 1997

    This book is a biography of my life in Antigua as well as my life in the states and how I was affected by the sudden death of my brother whom I did not know much of but shared an interesting connection with.

    The overall theme is illness and death and any other problems that come along with that. I look at my brother’s death through my own eyes as well as through his, the way I think he felt about his illness. I also discuss our family and how they dealt with his death and how our geographical location could have influenced his health.

1.)    “...And the way she distanced herself from him caused him great pain...”(pg 163)

-         Whether or not the people you know distance themselves from you or try to make themselves closer, their motives are obvious because both mean the worst is in store.

2.)”... And he knew that they knew of his situation, and so their scorn (they did not hide it) must have been especially painful...”

- Some people do not go the extra mile to make the person who is sick feel comfortable which in some cases is the right thing to do instead of acting rude.

Knowing that at some point in my life I will be close to dying, I hope that people will not look at me with pity or hate the same way people look at Jamaica’s brother because that is truly a terrible way to die, knowing that people hate you. Dying alone with no one by your side, in my perspective is the same as not having anyone that really cares for you your entire life. If people truly care about you, how can they not be by your side when you die to console and make you feel better?

HW#23

Jamaica Kincaid, My Brother, FSG, 1997

Section 2 of My Brother:

The second part of this book focuses more on the brother’s perspective and how Jamaica thinks he may have felt during the process of his illness and finally his death if he was thinking at all during his final moments. A brief history on her brother is given and it allows the reader to get more of a feel of the brother’s personality and the way he went about doing things.

1.) “That night as he lay dying and calling the names of his brothers and his mother, he did not call my name, and I was neither glad nor sad about this.”

-  Because of the lack of a bond between her brother and herself, her brother not calling out her name, affected her in a way that she was not sure about also due to their relationship.

2.) “He had read in a novel written by me about a mother who had tried and tried and failed and failed to abort the third and last of her three male children. And when he was dying he asked me if that mother was his mother and if that child was himself...”

-  Despite his being a bit slow and uneducated he picked up on the fact that the story was about him. Although he had not mentioned it before for whatever reason before, his illness and inevitable death drove him to ask whether or not that story was about him.  

3.) A great sadness over came me, and the source of the sadness was the deep feeling I always had about him:  that he had died without ever understanding or knowing , or being able to let the world in which he lived know, who he was; that who he really was- not a single sense of identity  but all the complexities of who he was –he could not express fully: his fear of being laughed at, his fear of meeting with the scorn of the people he knew best were overwhelming and he could not live with all of it openly.”

- Full description of who her brother basically was and her thoughts on how he felt even though he was so well known and liked my many people.

     The depiction of death through the eyes of Jamaica Kincaid is one that I hope I never have to deal with because of its gruesomeness and the way she is forced to think about her brothers sadness and basically carry his weight because it was something he was never able to get rid of due to his position in society and/or his position in their home. The way she describes how she thinks about her brother is something that bothers me because it makes me wonder if death always causes these thoughts amongst friends and family.

HW#21 Expert#1

-          “Men are much more reticent about seeking medical attention.”

(Gender greatly impacts a persons decisions regarding medical care.)

-          Industrialization and profit making of the medicine companies affects how patients are treated depending on their coverage and illness.

-          Never talking about death or dying or what would happen after.

-          Wanted people to see him as a human being for himself and not his disease.

-          “Honeymoon from death”

-          Looking at everyone who helped them as people not just tools benefited them and got them more care and help.

-          Cheerful doctors?

     Through Beth’s presentation, I realized something about myself that worried me. When hearing about the process she and her children had to go through I kept asking myself if I would be able to cope with losing my father or any family member, and the answer was no. Because I have never lost anyone, I have only had artificial encounters with death such as having to visit a sick family member at the hospital or hearing about someone I didn’t really know about die. Much like Beth’s older son, I feel as if not seeing someone in such a terrible state would be better for me because that sort of confrontation may affect me in a big way. The only difference is that I feel I would willingly not see whoever was sick to, as Beth said, preserve the memory of the person before that became ill and a shell of who they used to be. Despite my personal opinion of how my personality would handle something like this, in the end I would feel a need to see the person one last time because of the love I have for them.

     Gender always affects how we make our decisions; not because of what body parts we have but because of the difference in how we think. In many things including health, this difference affects what we do because we have different gender roles that we unknowingly follow. Using my own father and myself as an example, I realize that if either of us is hurt or need medical attention, we turn it into a test of strength and endurance by foolishly telling ourselves and other that we “don’t need any help” because we “are fine.”

     When I was hearing about the help they received and the multiple different medications that would have cost thousands of dollars they tried I wondered how about how lucky they were that they managed to get a government subsidy due to their lack of health insurance. Had they not received any of this help, all of the medicine and treatment would probably have been declined by an insurance company. How would Beth of felt if this occurred to her and how would it have affected her husband and family? 

HW#22

Jamaica Kincaid, MY BROTHER, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1997

Throughout the first chapter of the book which is about half of the book, it is very apparent through the illustration of her brothers sickness, the differences in dominant social practices between third world countries(like Antigua) and first world countries(U.S.A.).

From the moment I begin describing my brother’s sickness and the type of healthcare he is receiving, I draw a line that accents the differences between our countries care and others. Because of less money and less available resources, our hospitals have become more like care centers while no actual medical care. This difference defines the differences between dominant social practice and the separation between wanting and needing; this time pertaining our dominant social practices. When caring for my brother, the “doctors” and “nurses” could not do more than give him a Tylenol for his pains. They were even scared to touch him because they were afraid to contract Aids as well. This ignorance further proves the difference and lack of education in countries such as Antigua that are lower on the list for resources and medicinal benefits. 

HW#19

            Using the dominant practice in our society relating to health and death as a basis, I formed a small list that included all we have learned about in class. The organization of this list was a simple yes or no format in which the subjects taking the survey agreed or disagreed with the commonplace medicines and methods of taking care of the sick. In this case, I used my parents and the survey takers and received interesting feedback about the American culture and the obvious differences in treatment. For the most part my parents felt that when a person is sick, all of their requests should be attended to and only “happiness” should be shared with them; meaning that you should agree with anything they say and laugh at any jokes and pretend like everything is perfectly fine. But at what point do these perspectives stop being cultural and become more personal? From my own understanding about our dominant cultural perspectives, medicine and hospitals are what we rely on extensively to nurse us back to health instead of directly applying ourselves to the lives of those in need. Because of the highly influential power of the government, taking care of our sick is not as easy as it should be and once was.

           Despite our biggest wishes to personally take care of the sick because of our moral beliefs and/or religion, we cannot because of the high expenses and time issues that would lead us to deal with. Because of this, hospitals have become the more common decision despite the unfair treatment you receive if you do not have health care. As a result of that, death rates in immigrants and low income families sky rocket and no one cares. Unlike some countries where healthcare is equal and the sick are treated more justly without having to determine if their financial background is suitable enough.

          When I first read this assignment I decided to write about my understanding of the dominant culture perspectives and what my parents thought about it, but in the assignment I noticed a word that I did not recognize. When asked to include modality I did not know what to talk about so I looked up the definition. The two definitions given were “a classification of propositions on the basis of whether they claim necessity or possibility or impossibility,” and “a method of therapy that involves physical or electrical therapeutic treatment.” At first I was a little confused because from what I understood, it was basically saying that it is a classification of a possible choice depending on whether or not it’s necessary, possible, or impossible. But how is this related to the second definition which states it’s a form of therapy? Despite how unrelated the two seem, its basically describing the moment in which doctors must decide if their patients are suitable for treatment of if they have to do it because if not they will die; as well as providing a summary of how the health care system works in the United States. I may be jumping to conclusions about his interesting definition but it appears to be an odd coincidence that deserves further interpretation.