Patient’s Right To Know The Name of The Medicine
It is generally thought that the
patient has the right to know what remedy he is being given and by law doctor
is bound to tell the name of the prescribed remedy, because ultimately patient
is responsible for his own health. Is it true for homeopathic remedies? Practically
it is never beneficial for the patient to know the name of the homeopathic
remedy even if it was helpful. In this article we will discuss this issue in
detail. All the situations described below are real situations faced during
clinical practice.
1.
The
patient may have experienced it several times that when ever he used this
remedy (self-medication or otherwise), it aggravated his condition. Therefore he
makes up the opinion that this remedy is not suitable for him and he fears to
use that particular remedy and he will avoid to use that remedy. Whereas the
same remedy benefited the patient when it was given without disclosing its name.
2.
The
patient got enormous relief in some particular disease. Now there are two
things which are equally harmful, (i) he will generously suggest
that remedy to patients having the same disease or condition, (ii)
he may use this remedy for the same disease in future. Whereas in homeopathy
two patients suffering from the same disease may require the different remedies
depending upon their peculiarities. Moreover the same patient may require
different remedies for the same disease at different times. You can not imagine
the damage caused by this inadvertent use.
3.
During
treatment when the patient is heading towards cure, his symptoms take the form
of waves and cycle, i.e., disappearing and reappearing, with reduction in
duration, intensity and frequency. During this time, only placeboes are given
to the patient. Now if the patient knows the name of the remedy, he will take
the remedy during the return of the symptoms, or he may repeat the remedy in an
attempt to get a rapid relief, and by doing so he may spoil the case.
4.
Remedies
may have several shades and the doctor knows how he arrived at a particular
remedy. When the patient reads the symptoms of that remedy in a book or on the
internet, he finds that all or some of his symptoms do not match with the
remedy. Even worse, he may find that some symptoms of the remedy are exactly
opposite to his disease. He thinks that the doctor has not understood his case
and he loses the confidence in the doctor and does not take the prescribed
remedy.
5.
After
getting prescription, patients often get second opinion from another doctor, friends,
and patients having similar disease or pharmacy salesman and in almost all
cases potency is changed without the knowledge of the doctor. In some cases,
even the remedy is changed altogether. How can the doctor assess progress of
the case and proceed further?
6.
When
you tell the patient to take a single dose of this remedy and wait for a month
or two. The patient becomes suspicious and apprehensive about so long duration
of action of the remedy and he will not follow your instructions. He will
repeat the remedy without the doctor’s consent. He may lose confidence in your
prescription.
7.
There is a general concept that some remedies,
e.g., nosodes and snake poisons are very dangerous and deep acting, therefore
these should be avoided. By knowing the name of the remedy the patient may
become fearful, and will tend to avoid the treatment. The other drawback is
that if the patient takes the remedy in spite of having all the fears and
apprehensions about the treatment, his mental state will be altered altogether,
which will affect the treatment.
Now the question: if a patient switches doctor, how shall the new
doctor know as what had already been given?
It does not matter which remedy the
patient has taken previously, whether it was helpful or otherwise. The basic
rule for the second prescription is, each time the patient comes, take him as a
fresh case. Patient’s present condition and predominating symptoms will
determine the new remedy. Practically there may be several situations. Some
examples are given below which will explain that knowledge of the previous
medication is not so helpful.
i.
Previous
doctor has prescribed some patient combination preparations, may be one or more
different bottles.
ii.
Combination
remedies plus single remedies.
iii.
More
than one single remedies were alternated.
iv.
It
may happen that the previous remedy was not helpful because it was not the
indicated remedy.
v.
Although
the previous remedy was correct but it was not helping the patient due to wrong
potency or some other factors.
vi.
The
previous remedy was helpful but now at this stage it may not be indicated due
to change in symptoms. Therefore, fresh case taking is required.
Now the final question: How shall doctor be held accountable for the
consequences of medicine being given?
Technically it is very difficult to
prove that the homeopathic remedy has some adverse effect on the patient,
because several other factors can contribute to deteriorate the patient’s
condition and these have no connection with the doctor’s negligence. Some
examples are given below:
1.
Patient
has not followed the instructions properly, e.g. (i) medicine was not taken at
the regular intervals and at the proper time (ii) patient missed some medicine
doses.
2.
In
an attempt to get rapid relief, patients often take herbal and conventional
medicines along with homeopathic treatment, or they repeat the dose of
homeopathic remedy too frequently.
3.
Remedy
was not purchased from some reliable pharmacy.
4.
Patient
has consumed some food articles which have adverse effect on the homeopathic
remedy.
5.
It
is a well known reality that in most of the cases if homeopathic remedies do
not act favorably then they do not harm also.
Any comments, difference of opinion would be appreciated.
Thank you Dr.Sultan. But let us not deny that some (actually many) homeopaths hide behind these logic and play with the patients health purely to retain him/her forever. I have seen such doctors.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comments. I agree with you. It is a bitter reality but as a sincere homeopth I must tell the right way. Thanks again for your bold comments.
ReplyDelete