A "DEAD" GIVEAWAY

A bunch of us old folks meet for lunch once a week; we are all retired professors for the college of veterinary medicine. Like talking to a barber, we never talk politics or religion; however, because we have been doing this for a long time we can kind of guess political propensities. Last meeting, one member of our group made a statement about why he chose to become a veterinarian.  He said that he interviews three professionals before deciding on a career path; he talked to a dentist, a physician and a veterinarian. He explained  “the dentist was unhappy because he was tired of looking into the dirty mouths and smelling bad breaths, the physician was unhappy because of all the regulations, and the veterinarian was the only one happy with his career. Logically, he chose to become a veterinarian. I found his remarks telling.

As a person interested in evolutionary psychology, I believe there is genetic foundation to our behavior that guides us in our life’s preferences. I considered his remarks revealing of his political propensities. Wary of making assumptions and over reaching conclusions, I look for agreement from others for support. Does anyone else think he or she can tell he is a Republican from what he said as certainly as I think I can tell? First, all professional have to follow government regulations. When one stops and tries to enumerate the regulations that are burdensome, the argument falls apart. Every one of the “rules” has a professionally sound basis; therefore, would be something a professional would decide to do even if there were no regulation; this is true in all branches of medicine.

Obtain and display professional licenses and be licensed by the government to buy narcotics. FDA plays a big part, for example, discard expired drugs, and store vaccine in refrigerator, keep narcotics under lock, and a large number of rules applicable to proper use of antibiotics, etc. These are things every professional knows; therefore, are not burdensome; hey are just good medinice. In addition, for the physician and dentist, there are rules that apply to billing welfare patients etc that change from time to time but secretarial and nursing help takes care of these things. There are also rules intended to prevent Medicare fraud such as conducting testing that is not relevant or needed which unfortunately have resulted from what some professional colleagues have done; therefore, are necessary. Of course, all professionals are subject to fraudulent and malpractice law suite if regulations are not followed. Admittedly, there are regulations but for a young eager person to decide on a career on that basis seems ludicrous and perhaps disingenuous.

It is common knowledge the conservative mantra is deregulation. Conservatives see them selves as heroes above reproach and take personal affront if any one challenges their integrity. This is perhaps a reflection of hierarchy dominance; their propensity to feel the need to number one in the peck order. On the other hand, liberals see them selves as protecting one another from mistreatment, fraud, or malpractice, which is consistent with altruisms. Republican hate regulation while liberals see regulations as unavoidable. My conclusion is my lunch partner’s remark was unnecessary; therefore, he made the remark to establish his conservatism credentials. As an aside, his remark about dentistry, dirty mouths, and bad breath, seems disingenuous as well; after all, he specialized in pathology, and when not teaching, he had spent this professional career bent over a necropsy table.    

URL: firetreepub.blogspot.com Comments Invited and not moderated