Last year, my mother, a
few weeks before a milestone birthday, learned she needed major surgery. The
circumstances were not life-threatening. She would not be in the hospital long.
But the recovery would still be protracted and restrict her ability to care for
my father, who has Parkinson’s.
No worries. Her three
grown children, all of whom live in distant cities, snapped into action. We
would fly in for the surgery, call in extra help, telephone a few of her
friends and ask them to check in, drop off some food, otherwise be on call.
We congratulated ourselves
for a well-designed plan. There was only one problem.
My mother insisted we not
tell a soul.
“I don’t want to
inconvenience my friends,” she said. “Also, I don’t want people to feel sorry
for me, and I absolutely don’t want to listen to all their medical stories.
It’s just so wearying.”
How people decide whether
to go public with their medical conditions has long been highly sensitive and
deeply personal.
Certain situations, like
broken limbs and cancers that require chemotherapy,
are virtually impossible to keep secret.
Others, like H.I.V. and mental
illness, are easier to keep under wraps, at least for a time. Older
people, in my experience, lean more toward secrecy; younger toward disclosure.
These days, all of the old
rules have been thrown out. With more and more people used to sharing even the
most minute details of their daily lives on social media, centuries of customs
have been upended.
If you post photos of
yourself emptying your cat litter, filing your taxes or getting your cavity
filled, you can’t as easily come out later and say, “Oh, I’ve had muscular
dystrophy all these years and didn’t want to tell you.”
Or can you?
My father kept his
Parkinson’s quiet from even close friends for nearly a decade. “I was in
business,” he said. “I was building things and borrowing money. I didn’t want
to be considered a risk.” (Both of them approved my writing this here.)
So in our time of radical
disclosure, how should patients evaluate the risks and benefits of sharing
medical information?
You might save your life.
Paul Wicks is a
neuroscientist and A.L.S. specialist who now serves as a vice president of the
online support network Patients Like
Me. His research shows that patients are most open with their family
and current friends, least open with neighbors and childhood friends. Work
colleagues rank in the middle. Multiple
sclerosis, A.L.S. and epilepsy rank
highest on conditions people disclose; fibromyalgia,
mood disorders and H.I.V. rank
lowest.
“With something like
H.I.V., there are very clear issues about cultural reactions and risk of
infection,” he said. “But something like organ transplants are the opposite. If
you need a kidney
transplant, trust me, everyone will have to know. Finding a match is
nearly impossible.”
With these qualifications,
Dr. Wicks comes down strongly in favor of disclosure. His reason: You never
know where you can learn something that might save your life.
“As a doctor, I used to
give patients nuggets of wisdom,” he said, adding, “But I can’t meet every
patient.”
When patients seek out
others with similar illnesses, their knowledge grows exponentially. “It’s more
scalable, less serendipitous,” he said.
Even my mother, when she
broke down and divulged her operation to a friend, who happened to have the
same condition, radically changed her course of treatment.
Dr. Wicks’s research shows
that patients who participate in peer groups have learned tips about drug
sequencing or little-known specialists that proved critical to their care.
“The value of a
tweet-length piece of information can be the difference between life and
death,” he said.
Keep calm and lurk.
Stefania Vicaria is a
sociologist at the University of Leicester in Britain who has studied the
effect of social media on medicine.
A primary thing people
gain from going public is a sense of comfort in connecting with others, she
told me.
“The first thing people
get on social media is emotional support,” she said. “But it quickly shifts to
medical information as the patients go onto specialized websites and become
more expert in treatments, scientific trials and so on.”
Most people are
comfortable sharing their names in disease-specific forums, she said, even if
those forums are on Facebook, where membership in such a group can be visible
to their friends. The information in these discussions is so valuable that if
you still prefer anonymity, you should join under a pseudonym.
Dr. Wicks called this
lurking. “The ratio of people who contribute to Wikipedia versus people who use
Wikipedia is quite tiny,” he said. “You can just lurk in these forums and still
get much of the benefit.”
Tweet defensively. For those who choose to share their conditions with
their wider social networks, there is reason to be cautious. Heidi Adams is a
pediatric cancer survivor who has devoted her career to
helping young adults with cancer. Now the chief patient advocate at Rx4good,
Ms. Adams said that while it was harder for older people to share information
about their medical conditions, it was harder for young people to keep quiet.
“If anything, young people
are likely to overshare,” she said.
“You’ve been living your
life in public all these years, and suddenly you have this thing you may not
want to talk about.
Yet posting about that
scoop of ice cream you just had feels dumb. There’s a lot of pressure.”
Ms. Adams recommends
beginning conservatively, restricting the most intimate information to the most
limited outlets, like a blog or a CaringBridge site, whose privacy settings can be
changed later.
“Once you put things on
Facebook or Twitter, it’s out there forever,” she said. “You may want to share
things now, but sometime down the road, are you going to want those pictures of
you with your scars in public?”
In her case, she wanted
those things out there at the time of her treatment, she said, but as she moves
further away from it, she has changed her mind.
Control your surrogates.
When I got a cancer
diagnosis nine years ago, I made a critical misstep in disclosure in my early
days. I told everyone the date of my biopsy.
That meant when that day came, I got way more calls than I could handle.
From that day forward, I
appointed a chief information officer — in my case, my brother — whose job it
was to keep everyone informed.
While designating such a
figure can be helpful, Ms. Adams said, today it’s not sufficient. Patients have
to set clear parameters about what that person is allowed to say, share or post
in public.
“I don’t think you should
have any hesitation in telling that person: ‘Hey, can you please take that
photo down? I’m not ready to go public about that aspect of my condition.’” Her
one firm rule: “Don’t let people post pictures of you in the operating room.”
Victim no more.
The most surprising thing
I learned about this issue is that going public has one unexpected side effect:
It gives patients a sense of control over their lives at a time of often
intense helplessness.
“When you open up about
your condition, you don’t just receive information,” Dr. Wicks said, “you also
start sharing your own information with others. You get to be the helper
sometimes, and helping people makes you feel really good.”`
Ultimately, what I had
thought of as a black-and-white decision — tell or don’t tell — is now much
more nuanced: tell or don’t tell; tell, but not too much; or don’t tell but
stalk the web for tips among people who do tell. In other words, the best
professional advice on this issue is almost exactly the same as the best
professional advice on other medical matters:
Whatever you do, do it in
moderation.
Source: NYTimes
No comments:
Post a Comment