[terrified_in_TN]

XY, not trying to be argumentative, just trying to have a discussion.

Your right, bad choice of words on my part.  I do NOT believe you or anyone else is purposely concealing anything.  I don't think there is any big conspiracy going on.  It just *seems to me* there are a handful of posters, you included, that don't want the information revealed.  You even said it yourself:  You don't like doctors telling patients how long they have to live.  Its fine for you to tell your doctor "i don't want to know", but I don't think its fine to have the doctor not tell other patients.

Also just like your storm analogy.  I respect YOUR opinion on that, but OTHER people might want to know so they can "hope for the best, but prepare for the worst".

You are right, every time the subject of the odds come up, the threads turn into a firestorm.  I *FEEL* as if its the ones who discount/don't want to read it/say that stating the chances is pointless are really the ones who get the storm brewing.  If the chances are meaningless to you, why both participating in the discussion at all unless the information being presented is blatantly false...

Off subject, Just wanted to wish all a Happy Thanksgiving.  Stander or not, I wish nothing but the best for everyone here on HS.

-T

[RedStar]

TNT. We cannot state "the chances." That is one of the reasons that "odds" stir up discussion. I've already said that not only do we not know the true historical data, it could not offer a useful way to predict MLC outcomes at all! Our minds want it to, but it just cannot.

To give a newbie (or anyone) a numerical estimate of their "chances" can be seen as actually misinforming them. We are not obligated to substitute weak data for impossible-to-obtain good data. Sometimes what seems the "best" information is still unacceptably poor. But again...even if we had historicals, it wouldn't mean anything for that poster's real situation.

It is not an either/or proposition either. Not telling them they have bad chances is NOT in any way the same as telling them they are home free and are guaranteed success!

Nobody is keeping anything from anyone. It should be really clear to anyone who reads or posts here that the whole thing is uncertain! That is ALL we can say about "chances," and that has been borne out over and over by hundreds of thousands of posts.

Even if a bunch of posters here -- say, 1000 of them -- all voted to keep the so-called "odds" a secret from all newbies? It wouldn't change a thing in reality. This isn't their site, there's real information plainly already in the available content, and advice from those who are clear on how UNCERTAIN it all is would also post to the newbies.

And, just for fun (), almost everyone knows that the historical stats on marriage in the US (maybe elsewhere too) are that it ends in divorce upward of 40% of the time. Should we then use that to discourage people from getting married? Some have believed so. But for most of us, that stat is really quite useless in practice. It is historical data only. Further, it has gone up and down over time. As they say in the stock market, past performance is no guarantee of future results. And that is a field that is overmeasured, if anything is!

BTW, TNT...it has been proven that patients who are informed like that don't last long. It's a practice that is starting to get phased out. XY is right -- these doctors DON'T KNOW for sure, but they can cause harm by acting as if they do. (Yes, of course some cases are going to be clearly not survivable for long...fine print, fine print...)

[terrified_in_TN]

RedStar, again I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

Your right, we CAN'T state the chances because accurate figures are impossible to obtain.

I still stand by my statement that based upon what we see on HS alone, the odds are less in favor than more in favor of recon.  Divorce statistics, and remarriage statistics seem to concur.  Yes I know, re-marriage is not the benchmark from which successful recon is gauged.  Still, overwhelmingly again, based on what information we DO have available, all indicators seem to point to less recons than not.  I am confident that is an accurate statement.  I won't give statistics, because there are none to give (I agree there).

Also, it may be proven that patients who have been informed of their estimated time of life left to live or their odds of survival beating a specific terminal illness don't live long, what a shame to not be forthcoming with them if they want to know what they are potentially up against.  If a patient says "Doc, I don't care, I don't want to know" that's one thing, but to remove their right to know seems morally wrong to me.  I can't believe they would actually phase that practice out.  There are ALWAYS statistical outliers, so of course the Docs could be wrong.  But again, based upon the available data at the time it would seem cruel to me for a Doctor to conceal that information.

-T

[lawprofessor]

Regarding trying to determine the percentage of marriages that reconcile...my first question would be what definition is being used to identify that a person is actually having a MLC?

Without a clear and standardized tool to measure the "diagnosis" of MLC, how could you determine what the percentages are?


Referring to someone's MLCer as being a "kitty cat MLCer" is wrong in my eyes and mean spirited.

You can see it anyway you like.  It's hardly surprising that you react rather than respond after after all these years of you doing that over and over to something I write.  The only thing I can't understand is why you continue.  Perhaps it would be more beneficial to seek help in understanding why you have painted me as your nemesis than to continue to be stuck repeating this pattern over and over?

Domestic violence occurs throughout all socioeconomic groups. It is a terrible and sometimes deadly fate for victims.

True however not relevant to the context. With your nursing experience it's odd that you defend a man who suggests that those who suffer domestic violence and decide not to stand lack stamina.  Surely you're not suggesting you agree with that patently ridiculous statement?

Suggesting that your own situation is worse or better than another's is insensitive to other's pain and I hate seeing it here.

Interesting twist of words and context.  I don't need to suggest my situation is worse than anyone else's because I'm not looking for sympathy, recognition as a martyr, or to be a victim. Perhaps you should reconsider the lens you are using in evaluating posts?

I hate seeing all this fighting and arguing with one another on Heros Spouse.

What you see is not fighting but normal discussion between mature adults who have varying opinions on a discussion thread.  Perhaps it could be constructive to ask yourself why you are only comfortable when everyone thinks in a similar fashion as you do?

Differences of opinion are one thing but the tone of this thread is deeply disturbing.

XYZCF have you noticed that seemingly anything that doesn't agree with your thoughts is deeply disturbing to you?  It must be difficult to live in a diverse world where you find so much to be deeply disturbing.  I hope you find a way to learn to accept that others are allowed to have opinions that differ from yours without being deeply disturbed some day. 

Lp

[RedStar]

I still stand by my statement that based upon what we see on HS alone, the odds are less in favor than more in favor of recon. 

I have said many times that the history of what has happened, even if we had accurate numbers, in no way can predict what any one situation's outcome is. One can make the argument that there is literally no such thing as odds here.

And then, the action we take based on what our "odds" appear to be is a whole other issue, as hinted at with my point about marriage stats.

to remove their right to know seems morally wrong to me. <snip> conceal that information.

It's interesting that that's where you went with that regarding the patients. Nobody said anything about removing their right to know or concealing information. It's another non-either-or thing where a more common practice is being recognized as potentially harmful and so needs adjustment of some sort to mitigate that harm. I'm pretty sure we aren't at the bottom of the slippery slope yet.

It ties in though with the question of what is "information," and what is useful/productive/useless/harmful information. It's not just about what is true or false (or even discoverable), right? It's so complicated that it's hard to even discuss.

Anyway, good chatting with you about complicated matters.

[Not Applicable]

Xyz I was using you and me as hypothetical examples.

[terrified_in_TN]

I still stand by my statement that based upon what we see on HS alone, the odds are less in favor than more in favor of recon. 

I have said many times that the history of what has happened, even if we had accurate numbers, in no way can predict what any one situation's outcome is. One can make the argument that there is literally no such thing as odds here.

I guess the logic just fails me here.  I just can't comprehend your point of view.  While your statement is certainly true, the same could apply to other things besides MLC.  I guess what I am saying is, why bother keeping statistics on ANY subject???

And then, the action we take based on what our "odds" appear to be is a whole other issue, as hinted at with my point about marriage stats.

to remove their right to know seems morally wrong to me. <snip> conceal that information.

It's interesting that that's where you went with that regarding the patients. Nobody said anything about removing their right to know or concealing information. It's another non-either-or thing where a more common practice is being recognized as potentially harmful and so needs adjustment of some sort to mitigate that harm. I'm pretty sure we aren't at the bottom of the slippery slope yet.

I am relieved to hear that.  I take it you must be in the medical field?  Off topic, but I am curious...if so, just curious...since that practice is being phased out, what do they do now?  I *assume* just don't bring up odds/estimated time of life left unless specifically asked by the patient?

It ties in though with the question of what is "information," and what is useful/productive/useless/harmful information. It's not just about what is true or false (or even discoverable), right? It's so complicated that it's hard to even discuss.

Anyway, good chatting with you about complicated matters.

Same to you.   

[Treasur]

My mother, who was also a nurse, told me once that in her experience, seriously ill people fell into two camps broadly - those that wanted detailed information bc they wanted to control their choices and those that did not bc they preferred to trust the experts. Perhaps the same is true for LBS.....

Any chance we could sidle back a bit closer to the original question and interesting discussion now? If talking about outcomes is not so productive, I must admit that I find it interesting to learn how others use their MLC lens and the underpinning beliefs about MLC to be 'stuck' or 'unstuck'

[Thunder]

For what it's worth, I was very blessed to have a mild MLCer.

When I read stories about abusers, neglected children or Monsters, I do think a lot of LBS's have had it MUCH worse than I did.

Yes mine was very painful, they all are, but some were definitely much more painful than mine, IN MY OPINION ONLY.
 

[Acorn]

Any chance we could sidle back a bit closer to the original question and interesting discussion now? If talking about outcomes is not so productive, I must admit that I find it interesting to learn how others use their MLC lens and the underpinning beliefs about MLC to be 'stuck' or 'unstuck'

Yes, PLEASE!

Before I sign off, I would like to make a comment about ‘statistics.’  Adult knowledge 101 but it seems to have been ignored a bit on this thread.

Generally speaking, statistics is about the overall picture of a large group of subjects/population.  It is not possible to forecast individual cases.  Well, unless one is a fortune teller....  It’s about probabilities, not possibilities for you, me or anyone.

For example, the probability of me winning Lotto Max Jackpot in Canada is 0.00000003%.
Is is possible for me to win?  Yes.