Nice one ren:)
And I may not have met your/PR's doctor, QV, but I like him already. my main GP is something like that, although we of course have the NHS here. But unlike many others I've known, he is actually a kindly man, with a good manner as well as simply being employed to stitch up broken bits of people. A lot of them seem to concern themselves only with the welfare of the body itself, and don't particularly care for the suffering or lack thereof, of what lives in it, too many will leave the inhabitant of said body to its misery when they can easily do something to alleviate it, this guy won't. Was the only one who actually went and made sure I had some adequate pain relief after my hurting my eye. One of them outright accused me of either faking/lying in order to get something to abuse (when mind you, I'd had the eye examined in detail by specialists and the damage confirmed with their own two working eyes, or doing the damage myself (I.e deliberately) for the same reason. Stupid fucking bitch, incompetent cow too, once scripted me co-amoxiclav seconds to a minute or two after asking if I had any allergies and being told that I was allergic to penicillin and other beta-lactam antibiotics. And another one I managed to, after a long and persistent effort, drag a few oxy 10s out of him, but bitched at me for coming back after my regular GP told me instead of using oral analgesia to deal with the eye using topical local anaesthetic drops, which I knew to be precisely the wrong way to go about it (overuse can damage the eye), and then after seeing the eye people again to confirm that from their own mouths, coming back the day after my regular GP, not having the correct information to go on to base his decision on not to then provide further oral opioid analgesia coverage, bitched me out for coming when that regular doc said no, but that decision being made based upon faulty, if well-meaning information. As soon as that regular GP, the decent guy, KNEW that, he changed his mind straight away.
If a decision is made meaning well but based upon faulty information, and is thus the wrong decision, then it should be re-evaluated should it not?
