Those Lying Patients
#1
Posted Jun 9, 2005 @ 8:58 PM
#2
Posted Jun 9, 2005 @ 10:18 PM
Not only was she a quirky, amusing character (helped immensely by being portrayed by a wonderful actress), but her plotline also gave us all sorts o' House characterization. One the most obvious level, so much humor! House's refusal to suffer her insufferable son, his reaction to her comparison of him and Aston Kutcher. The line: "I'm too handsome for paperwork!" And Wilson's recitation of her poem? Comic platinum.
But the best thing about it -- one of the first looks of House's compassion and sensitivity in how he handled her attempt to refuse the cure. I melted. Into a puddle. Yet, it was still subtle, and not out of character. (We should start a thread for starry-eyed crushes on the writers, now that I think of it.)
I would stop watching the show in horror & disgust if they ever started trying to sell House as a sensitive and compassionate fellow. But if they'll continue to give us brief, yet powerful, glimpses into his character,and that side of him, like this, I'll be devoted to the very end.
#3
Posted Jun 9, 2005 @ 10:37 PM
"My ob-gyn died recently. Nice man. Warm hands." "Not anymore."
Like the syphillitic poetess, a very squicky subject handled with aplomb and humor, and highlighting the sensitivity AND the snark.
#4
Posted Jun 10, 2005 @ 7:01 AM
#5
Posted Jun 13, 2005 @ 11:06 AM
But the best thing about it -- one of the first looks of House's compassion and sensitivity in how he handled her attempt to refuse the cure.
Oh, Britomart, you are so right on the money on this one. Between House's humanity with Mrs. Syphilis, AND the poem (who could forget the poem!?), this is definitely one of the best side-plot patients so far.
I also want to take a moment to do the shout-out for my favorite guest star this season, Cynthia Ettinger as the mom in "Heavy." A hard episode to watch, especially for Chase fans, but I thought she was spot-on perfect. Plus I love her and want to be her when I grow up. (Yes, I am 33, why do you ask?)
#6
Posted Jun 13, 2005 @ 11:39 AM
#7
Posted Jun 15, 2005 @ 4:31 PM
Edited by mujer, Jun 15, 2005 @ 4:34 PM.
#8
Posted Jun 17, 2005 @ 1:39 PM
Hey, maybe we should start a favorite clinic patient poll...
#9
Posted Jun 17, 2005 @ 3:23 PM
Runners-up include: Pregnant "Maternity" Lady, Elderly Syphillitic Poetess, Brilliant Kitty Figurine Saving baby, and Slaps Himself On Command Hiccuping Guy.
Edited by Meems, Jun 17, 2005 @ 3:29 PM.
#10
Posted Jun 17, 2005 @ 3:36 PM
#11
Posted Jun 17, 2005 @ 3:43 PM
To watch the baseball game.I did love "do her or you're gay" guy. I wonder what he came into the clinic for anyway?
#12
Posted Jun 17, 2005 @ 3:45 PM
#13
Posted Jun 17, 2005 @ 3:48 PM
#14
Posted Jun 17, 2005 @ 3:48 PM
Do 'er or you're gay" guy is my favorite clinic patient. No contest.
He's my favorite, hands down. In fact, that's definitely in my top five favorite comedic scenes of the season list. BTW - he came in for an employee physical, after which, House notes, both the patient and House have to go back to work.I did love "do her or you're gay" guy. I wonder what he came into the clinic for anyway?
Oh - and I'm not sure if this counts or not, but a close runner up is (God, I can't believe I'm about to type this)... Carmen Electra. I think she was a good sport about it all and HL just looked like he was having a great time with it. His facial expressions alone were fabulous and he got to say things like "she's here to play out my fantasy, not because she's Meryl Streep" and "Baywatch Thespian" and "if we have to look at a leg..."
Edited by Lizzim, Jun 17, 2005 @ 3:51 PM.
#15
Posted Jun 17, 2005 @ 4:49 PM
#16
Posted Jun 21, 2005 @ 12:36 PM
Ramona is definitely one of my faves. "Close your legs" and that look exchanged between House and the nurse when Ramona said having to compete with women who put out was worse than in high school never fail to amuse me.I thought Peter Graves and his mistress were my favorites, especially when House realizes they're not married to each other.
Although technically not real, I loved the guy who played House in Three Stories. When he comes back and says it hurts again there something about the way he looks at House that always gets me. Maybe he can come back again, whether or not as a figment of House's imagination or in the flesh.
#17
Posted Jun 28, 2005 @ 7:37 PM
(And I can't swear to it, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that she and Dave Navarro are big fans of the show, so that just makes me like her even more.)
They're still married? So happy for Carmen that it's lasted longer than her liaison with Dennis Rodman.
Anyway, I loved the baby and crunchy-granola mom with the all natural frog in Paternity. The way that kid reacted to House was beautiful. Perfect snark fodder, and it turned out to be the key to lacrosse kid's troubles.
#18
Posted Jul 4, 2005 @ 1:54 PM
So, this got me to thinking about the patient in Mob Rules. The fundamental dishonesty of his life was the key factor in his diagnosis. (Please understand, though, that I’m not arguing that lying about his homosexuality while a member of the mafia was unethical. It was eminently sane and necessary, I’m sure.) And, though I’m hard-pressed to argue that testifying against the mafia could be unethical, can we categorize his motivation as unethical? Self-preservation is particularly interesting, I think, because it’s a common motivating factor that can easily be either ethical or unethical. What do all of y'all think?The diagnosis always has to do with the flaws and foibles of the person House is treating.
#19
Posted Jul 4, 2005 @ 10:23 PM
#20
Posted Jul 4, 2005 @ 10:47 PM
::sigh:: Don't you hate it when pesky details you'd forgotten rear their ugly heads to torpedo an argument? You're absolutely right, deekay. I'd forgotten a lot of that & knowing he was gay wouldn't have helped at all with the diagnosis.Even if he'd said he was gay, the link between being gay and taking estrogen is pretty obscure, and the connection between that and the protein disease is even more obscure.
So, the worst that can be said of him is that he put his brother in a tough spot by not being more forthcoming, but that has nothing to do with personal ethics in my book, and I think it was absolutely his call whether or not he told *anyone*. No ethical discussion here...
#21
Posted Jul 4, 2005 @ 11:03 PM
The nun might be a better example for your attempt ... though we might be getting a much closer look at Dante's inferno if we try to call her unethical. She lied about her life before the convent, as did her Mother Superior, but they didn't think it was relevant. And neither did House when he first heard about it, though it ended up being the key to that diagnosis.
ETA: You weren't completely wrong about mobster guy's deception though - his being gay was one of the keys in that case. It was just an example of a case where there was more than one key, and knowing only that piece of information wouldn't have solved the puzzle.
Edited by deekay, Jul 4, 2005 @ 11:14 PM.
#22
Posted Jul 5, 2005 @ 7:16 AM
I think that the sick Arnello brother should have disclosed the full range of medications (herbal and not) that he was taking... the fact that he was gay wasn't relevant to his case, but the fact that he was taking an "herbal supplement" marketed to gay men was. What stopped him from disclosing this was that it would have outed him, which he clearly didn't want to do.Even if he'd said he was gay, the link between being gay and taking estrogen is pretty obscure, and the connection between that and the protein disease is even more obscure.
I don't necessarily think that his motivation (wanting to remain closeted) was necessarily unethical... sad, perhaps, but not unethical, particularly since I don't think it occurred to him that the herbs he was taking had any possibility of being related to his illness.
#23
Posted Jul 5, 2005 @ 9:50 AM
Britomart's point (on the sticky wicket thread, I think) rings true for me here - sometimes patients just aren't equipped to know what's relevant or understand the consequences, and maybe shouldn't be held responsible for lack of disclosure, because they don't know what they're supposed to disclose. I wonder if he was asked specifically about herbal stuff ... many people don't think of that as medication. Same with the nun - she didn't think her birth control or abortion was relevant, and had no way of knowing it was. So I probably wouldn't relate it to their ethics.I think that the sick Arnello brother should have disclosed the full range of medications (herbal and not) that he was taking...I don't think it occurred to him that the herbs he was taking had any possibility of being related to his illness.
#24
Posted Jul 5, 2005 @ 10:24 AM
Yep, the more I think about this, the more I'm brought back to intent. I think that in order to judge the ethics of a patient, at a personal or medical level, you have to understand their intent. With the nun & the mobster, I think you're both right in thinking they didn't have any idea that what they were hiding could have anything to do with their current illness & treatment.sometimes patients just aren't equipped to know what's relevant or understand the consequences, and maybe shouldn't be held responsible for lack of disclosure, because they don't know what they're supposed to disclose
I think a patient has to be deliberately deceiving their doctor/the medical community, knowing what they're lying about might be a factor. Which brings us back to Elise & Carly. I just thought of him, and you know who might be the most clear-cut example of this? The diabetic who was lying about his condition and medication to score Viagra.
#25
Posted Jul 5, 2005 @ 4:23 PM
He was an idiot. It was both stupid and unethical for him to lie to score Viagra - stupid because it could kill him; unethical because he was placing his physician (in this case, House) at risk for losing his license and living with the repercussions of killing a patient (or at a minimum, House would have to defent himself against the inevitable lawsuit). I can understand that, for the sake of a funny punchline, House would prescribe the Viagra anyway, but from a realistic perspective, it was a ridiculous thing to do.The diabetic who was lying about his condition and medication to score Viagra.
#26
Posted Aug 2, 2005 @ 10:30 AM
#27
Posted Aug 2, 2005 @ 1:04 PM
The diagnosis always has to do with the flaws and foibles of the person House is treating.
I think that the sick Arnello brother should have disclosed the full range of medications (herbal and not) that he was taking... the fact that he was gay wasn't relevant to his case, but the fact that he was taking an "herbal supplement" marketed to gay men was.
sometimes patients just aren't equipped to know what's relevant or understand the consequences, and maybe shouldn't be held responsible for lack of disclosure, because they don't know what they're supposed to disclose.
I think it's not so much about what the patients believe is or isn't relevant as the things they convince themselves aren't relevant because they don't want to reveal them. It's not neutral details that they leave out, but rather information that says something about the patient and their lifestyle or history. They don't want to reveal it, so they take on a decision that should belong to the medical staff, and reject the uncomfortable things as irrelevant when they're not truly qualified to know if they are or aren't.
I think the underlying theme is probably lack of trust in the doctors to do their job: the patients worry about the moral judgement that might be made, so they don't give all the information for the correct medical judgement to be made. Not quite "everybody lies", but "everybody selectively edits the truth to make themselves more comfortable".
And it's a motif that comes up a lot. The parents in Paternity decided for themselves that the fact their son was adopted shouldn't matter, so they didn't give that information. The nuns didn't believe a sister should be judged for how she lived before, so they didn't give House enough details to look at that period for medical clues. The mobster's herbal supplement wasn't mentioned as a possible cause because it could lead to him being outed. (I'm sure there are more examples, but I'm still catching up on episodes.)
It's about the patients investing more in keeping up their self image in front of the doctor than in actually allowing the doctor to treat them. And when it's taken to extremes, you get cases like the woman in Fidelity who would have died rather than admit to her affair and be cured.
#28
Posted Aug 4, 2005 @ 12:30 AM
I've been to the doctor before where I tried to give all the info I knew, and they didn't want to hear it, b/c they were in a hurry and thought I was wasting their time. And I've also given the exact same info to seven different doctors and a bunch of nurses, all of whom (?) seemed to be using the same checklist.
So are the patients really lying everytime, or is Cameron not asking the difficult questions to make it easier on them?
#29
Posted Aug 4, 2005 @ 11:06 AM
It's not always Cameron - all of the ducklings take histories. Since the patients are always admitted with a mysterious malady, my guess is the ducklings ask a lot of questions and listen carefully to everything since they don't have a diagnosis in mind already and don't know (or think they know) what might be important later.So are the patients really lying everytime, or is Cameron not asking the difficult questions to make it easier on them?
Interesting thought, nomad - particularly since many of us on the forums find House to be a pretty non-judgemental guy. Ironic then that patients are concealing these things from one of the only people who probably wouldn't hold their foibles against them...I think it's not so much about what the patients believe is or isn't relevant as the things they convince themselves aren't relevant because they don't want to reveal them. It's not neutral details that they leave out, but rather information that says something about the patient and their lifestyle or history.
#30
Posted Aug 4, 2005 @ 10:49 PM
I think that's exactly what David Shore was getting at in that flaws and foibles quote - that House's real job is to find out what the patient is lying about (or omitting from the truth). The cases don't come to him if a simple test can diagnose it, so when he's not using trial and error to learn something new, he's sort of diagnosing the person, not the illness.Ironic then that patients are concealing these things from one of the only people who probably wouldn't hold their foibles against them...









