Do you think hospitals should include alternative therapies and encourage spiritual activities ?
Do you think hospitals should include alternative therapies and encourage spiritual activities ?
Do you think hospitals should include alternative therapies and encourage spiritual activities as part of treatment? or stick to the conventional scientific treatment only?
Best answer:
Answer by hillbilly
Hospitals are businesses and their treatments are their incomes. They depend on insurance companies to pay so how they treat depends whether or not they will make money. That’s reality. Don’t get me wrong , there are a lot of good caring people working in hospitals but money is the bottom line. So should they provide those services, in my opinion, yes if they think there is merit to them. Should they be required to, no.
What do you think? Answer below!
Guitar Technique Product – Alternate Picking Fast Start
Electric guitar players are obsessed with learning to pick fast on guitar. This brand new product is 100% focused on giving them the tools to reach that goal.
Guitar Technique Product – Alternate Picking Fast Start
Healing with Complementary & Alternative Therapies NEW
 | US $54.22 End Date: Saturday Feb-18-2012 3:31:51 PST Buy It Now for only: US $54.22 Buy it now | Add to watch list |
Complementary and Alternative Therapies Research
 | US $41.43 End Date: Saturday Feb-18-2012 6:07:35 PST Buy It Now for only: US $41.43 Buy it now | Add to watch list |
Complementary and Alternative Therapies for Epilepsy De
 | US $194.64 End Date: Saturday Feb-18-2012 6:09:13 PST Buy It Now for only: US $194.64 Buy it now | Add to watch list |
Related posts:
- can you recomend a spiritual or alternative therapy to help heal my physical health?
- Alternative therapies?
- Does anyone know of any alternative therapies for Cerebral palsy?
- How can I advertise an international alternative therapies conference free of charge?
- Q&A: What are some alternative therapies for Fibro Mialgia?
I think hospitals should stick with scientifically proven treatments.
And in the context of medical treatment ‘alternative’ is , after all, another way of saying ‘unproven’. If a treatment has been proven to be effective, it is no longer ‘alternative medicine’, it’s just medicine.
If I went to hospital with a serious illness or injury, I’d feel a hell of a lot safer knowing that the treatments I was having were tried, tested and proven and had been effective in treating others with the same condition, rather than thinking someone might be using experimental and unproven treatments on me.
I don’t know what you might mean by ‘spiritual activities’; but unless they’ve been proven in double-blind clinical trials then no, I don’t think hospitals should be wasting resources on them
Absolutely, but the way things are set up now from the government to the medical profession (AMA and FDA…). The approval of new “alternative methods” is virtually impossible or takes too much time and effort to be worth it.
I have, however started to see certain practices established that are run by doctors with formal medical education (MD’s) who also bring a holistic background and approach to their practice. Most of these are Indian and Chinese doctors who grew up with Eastern philosophy and were educated here in the states or in Europe.
I guess their ability to provide this “hybrid” approach is enabled by having stand alone facilities and staffs that are not bound by hospital rules
It is a fascinating approach and one I fully support.
Mark
By spiritual activities I hope you mean there is easy access to a priest or a nun or a rabbi, imam, etc, etc, for counseling and religious services. If you do, then I agree with you.
Alternative therapies that don’t work on the other hand do not belong in hospitals.
Spiritual/ religious services, yes, alternative therapies, big fat no.
If it works, then it’s included in hospitals, if it’s not, it stays outside.
Why would a hospital want to include something that doesn’t work? You do know what hospitals are for don’t you?
No, hospitals should focus their time, money, and effort on things that can be PROVEN to work.
No. The NHS should only invest in evidence based healthcare. The UK has always been a hot bed for woo-woo and we waste millions every year on what is essentially witchcraft. It’s scandalous to promote alternative health treatments that have never been demonstrated to work when at the same time, certain cancer drugs (which have been PROVEN) to extend the life of cancer sufferers, are being denied to patients on the grounds of costs.
In the UK, the NHS has Chaplains’ who offer a service of spiritual care to all patients, their carers, friends and family as well as the staff of the NHS. Chaplains are salaried NHS employees. I have very mixed feelings about this service.
Spiritual things are best left to the clergy, which is why most US hospitals have a chapel and at least one clergy on staff.
I don’t think spiritual activities (meaning religious) or alternative practices should be an official part of any hospital’s budget. If people have religious beliefs, then presumably they have their own priest/pastor/iman who can come in and chat with them. The government (speaking as a Canadian) via my taxes shouldn’t be paying for that. There was recently a broo haha here in British Columbia when one of the Health Authorities layed off several “spiritual directors” for budget reasons. I supported that move, as they shouldn’t have been on the payroll in the first place. Traditionally, many hospitals were founded by religious groups (I work in a St Mary’s, for example) but they have no role in today;’s modern world. I’m an atheist, so I do have a bit of bias regarding religous mumbo jumbo in a hospital. There is no evidence that prayer or religious beliefs have ever made a difference in a medical problem. The pious and the atheist get well or not, at exactly the same rate.
The same applies to so called alternative medicine (SCAM). If it doesn’t work….and NONE of it does beyond the placebo effect, then it doesn’t belong, and my tax dollars shouldn’t be paying for it. If people want it, they can pay for it privately.
hospitals do not treat patients,doctors do.some hospitals do allow accupuncture to be done on patients,with a doctor order.and some hosptials do have clergy/chapels.
I see nothing wrong with these practices, however,I think it is wrong to impose these requirements on hospitals.this would cause a great financial burden.hospitals have to jump through enough hoops to remain jacho/state certified ,to receive funds. and patients pay for it,in their bills.
hospital bills are expensive enough as it is.
No,they should not! Hospitals should only use methods which are proven to work. There are enough problems in hospitals without adding to them.