February 5, 2006
WITH SPECIAL SMOKE-FREE ROOMS SET ASIDE TO RESPECT THEIR PRIVACY
Self-harmers to be given clean blades(Sarah-Kate Templeton, The Times, Februray 5th, 2006)
Nurses want patients who are intent on harming themselves to be provided with clean blades so that they can cut themselves more safely.They say people determined to harm themselves should be helped to minimise the risk of infection from dirty blades, in the same way as drug addicts are issued with clean needles.
This could include giving the “self-harm” patients sterile blades and clean packets of bandages or ensuring that they keep their own blades clean. Nurses would also give patients advice about which parts of the body it is safer to cut.
The proposal for “safe” self-harm — which is to be debated at the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) Congress in April — is likely to provoke controversy.
But not that much.
No, no, no. They've got it all wrong. What they should be giving out is a .38 loaded with Glasers or similar ammunition which safely destroys the inside of the patient's skull without exiting the far side. Unless of course some fuddy-duddy thinks that helping patients harm themselves is contrary to old-fashioned medical ethics.
The idea that medical professionals should not facilitate and enable harm was probably made up as part of the patriarchical conspiracy. We are beyond all that sort of thing now, which is why we call ourselves, "progressives."
Posted by: Lou Gots at February 5, 2006 6:46 AMCondoms for rapists. If they're going to rape, might as well prevent the spread of disease and unwanted pregnancy.
Posted by: RC at February 5, 2006 7:18 AMNext thing you know, they'll be giving free needles to druggies and . . . no, wait! . . .
Posted by: Mike Morley at February 5, 2006 8:19 AMYou wonder if what they're really doing is giving out sharper blades, in the hope these folks'll finish themselves off.
"Yes, the patient died, doctor, but look - no sepsis!"
Posted by: pj at February 5, 2006 8:52 AMThis is too depressing for comment.
Posted by: erp at February 5, 2006 9:17 AMwhich is to be debated at the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) Congress in April....
A clue?
Posted by: Barry Meislin at February 5, 2006 9:33 AMDepressing???
C'mon erp, that is GREAT satire! This "Times" Peter excerpts from must be better than the Onion.
"Cut themselves more safely...."
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!
"It's a fair cop, but Oiv'e got to cut meself.... safely, you unnerstan'..."
Oh, man that is really rich. Glad to see the spirit of Monty Python lives on!
I say that we give Democrats a safe country to ruin, one that won't matter to the global state of affairs. Like Finland maybe, or Switzerland.
Posted by: Robert Duquette at February 5, 2006 11:00 AM> I say that we give Democrats a safe country to ruin
Are they done with North Korea already?
By the way, why aren't we mandating vitamin supplements in fortified wine?
And we thought America's needle exchange programs for heroin addicts was the last word in government helping people compassionately kill themselves.
Posted by: John at February 5, 2006 12:36 PMI don't see how any body an make a living as a satirist anymore. Who, for instance, would have thought up this one?
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 5, 2006 3:00 PMWhat really worries me is that the slope is now too slippery. How can we conservatives be harbingers of doom if, as Robert says, we can't even conceive of the next big progressive thing. Are we going to be driven to "Don't subsidize gasohol or all of us bourgeoisie will be driven out to the collective farms for reeducation?"
Posted by: David Cohen at February 5, 2006 4:30 PMThe collective farms are owned by Cargill, An evil capitalist company.
Posted by: jdkelly at February 5, 2006 4:50 PMBy the way, why aren't we mandating vitamin supplements in fortified wine?
Years ago a liquor producer, upon learning that alcohol depletes certain vitamins, tried to get permission to add them to his product. The Feds forbid it, saying that it would imply that drinking was good for you.
Posted by: PapayaSF at February 5, 2006 7:36 PMRobert:
I don't see how any body can make a living as a satirist anymore.
If you look at my tagline on the post on Scottish churches just a couple above here, imagine my surprise this morning.
Posted by: Peter B at February 6, 2006 5:18 AMPeter B: You're right. Something else you couldn't make up. Your link is almost enough to make one run out and join the LeFebrevites or Polish Old Catholics or something.
Posted by: Lou Gots at February 6, 2006 2:56 PM