Skip to main content

If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

"He’s 26 years old but still sees a pediatrician: Why some young adults don’t move on" (WaPo).

What the hell is wrong with sticking with your regular family doctor? You have a relationship with this person. He or she is a real doctor. It's not like you're going to a veterinarian. You like what you have. Why is The Washington Post age-shaming the young?

Well, age-shaming the young is an old game. Grow up, they say and have been saying for eons. If it's not that you're acting too babyish and unserious, it's that you're old before your time. I say a young person can be young in the way that feels right to them. I say you are the master of your own time. You are how you feel, and you don't have to match up your chronological age with a stereotype of how people that age are supposed to be. I mean, take care of yourself, don't hurt others, and work on making your life what you want it to be. And use your actual chronological age when interfacing with a system that uses chronological age — getting a driver's license, running for President, etc. But other than that, you're your own person. Don't let people push you around with act-your-age shaming.

Anyway... from the article (which I'm finally skimming):
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) attempted to address the issue of transition from pediatric care into adult care in a policy statement in 2017 and concluded “the age of transition” should be based not on a number but on the patient’s individual needs. The decision “should be made solely by the patient (and family, when appropriate) and the physician and must take into account the physical and psychosocial needs of the patient and the abilities of the pediatric provider to meet those needs,” the policy statement said. In addition, it said that ‘the establishment of arbitrary age limits on pediatric care by health care providers should be discouraged. Health care insurers and other payers should not place limits that affect the patient’s choice of care provider based solely on age.”...

Living at home and remaining on parents’ insurance policies aren’t the only reasons ­20-somethings stay with pediatricians. Medical advancements over the past decade are extending the life expectancy of those with chronic childhood illnesses, such as congenital heart issues, cystic fibrosis, hemophilia and diabetes, and the pediatricians who cared for children with these conditions sometimes remain with them as they get old....
And I want to criticize the Washington Post's illustration for its "26 years old but still sees a pediatrician" article (skillfully, charmingly rendered by Ery Burns):



The idea is, clearly, that the millennial is a snowflake. Now, what I think is interesting is that of course the generic snowflake millennial is a white male. Secondly, his snowflakitude is signaled by the playthings (presumably the stuff one encounters in a pediatrician's waiting room) but also by the colors he wears, notably pink pants. I've got a problem with the use of pink to say weak and childish. Pink is associated with females. It's a purplish pink and the jacket is purple. I think the message is: effeminacy. I reject the use of femininity to mean weakness and childishness.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"The theory that we are living in a computer simulation may sound bizarre, but it has found adherents."

"The technology entrepreneur Elon Musk has said that the odds that we are not simulated are 'one in billions.' Professor Smoot estimates that the ratio of simulated to real people might be as high as 10¹² to 1.... [I]f our universe has been created by an advanced civilization for research purposes, then it is reasonable to assume that it is crucial to the researchers that we don’t find out that we’re in a simulation. If we were to prove that we live inside a simulation, this could cause our creators to terminate the simulation — to destroy our world. Of course, the proposed experiments may not detect anything that suggests we live in a computer simulation. In that case, the results will prove nothing. This is my point: The results of the proposed experiments will be interesting only when they are dangerous." From "Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out/Experimental findings will be either boring or extremely dangerous" by philosophy pro...

"It's just a type of berry from Japan, unfortunately. Very cool though!"

Went to a small fruit farm were they grew strawberries crossed with raspberries. from r/pics Rubus illecebrosus — "a red-fruited species of Rubus that originally came from Japan (where is it called バライチゴ, roseberry), but is also very popular in some European countries like Lithuania. Common names include balloon berry and strawberry raspberry."

"Are You Rich? This Income- Rank Quiz Might Change How You See Yourself."

This is a little 5-question quiz in the NYT. One of the questions is "In your view, being 'rich' means having an income in the ..." — with various choices: "top 25%, top 20%, top 15%, top 10%, top 5%, top 1%." So the answer you get to "Are you rich?" is based on your own definition of who is rich. I only need to make $153,000 to be in the top 5% where I live and only $175,000 to be in the top 5% in the NYC metropolitan area. Who thinks they're rich if they make $175,000 in NYC? Can you even afford a 1-bedroom apartment?! From the article accompanying the quiz: The researchers found that a “vast majority” of their respondents believed they were poorer, relative to others, than they actually were. The people who thought they were right in the middle of the income distribution – perfectly middle class, you might say — were, on average, closer to the 75th percentile. And as a group, respondents whose incomes actually resembled the true median thou...