Level One
• The Use of Force is about a girl who may have Diphtheria, but refuses to open her mouth to let the doctor look at her throat. After much struggle, emotional and physical, the doctor forces her to open her mouth and it turns out she does indeed have the disease.
Level Two
• Setting – It’s not actually mentioned, but it is implied that it at the Olson’s house, a doctor is called to look at the daughter as she is not feeling well.
• The Characters –
o The parents are pretty static characters, they do not change much through the story
o The daughter, Mathilda, is somewhat dynamic as she changes from stubborn and defiant (line 18) to broken, betrayed and angry. (last paragraph)
o The doctor is the most dynamic character as, through his tactics changes his attitude. At first the doctor tries kindness and almost sides with the daughter over the parents (line 22). As the story goes on he tries scaring the girl into submission and (line 25), as his anger and frustration build, eventually resorts to force (line 28).
• Conflict –
o The main conflict is between Mathilda and the doctor. The doctor needs to check Mathilda’s throat to see if she has Diphtheria, but the girl will not open her mouth.
o There is also a conflict between the parents and themselves/the doctor. They want to go along with the doctor because they know he must check, but they do not want force or hurt their daughter in order to get her to submit.
• The doctor’s dilemma is that if he leaves the girl alone he will not be able to check if she has Diphtheria and may possibly die. If he continues on the road he’s going he will have to resort to measures that are socially unacceptable and even cruel.
• Irony –
o Although it seems cruel, and almost brutal, using force was the only remaining way for the doctor to check Mathilda’s condition to take appropriate action.
In her personal essay, Dr. Grant writes that she learned that most cases involving her patients should not be only handled from a doctor’s point of view but also from personal experience that can help her relate to each patient regardless of their background; Dr. Grant was taught this lesson when she came face to face with a unique patient. Throughout her essay, Dr. Grant writes about how she came to contact with a patient she had nicknamed Mr. G. According to Dr. Grant, “Mr. G is the personification of the irate, belligerent patient that you always dread dealing with because he is usually implacable” (181). It is evident that Dr. Grant lets her position as a doctor greatly impact her judgement placed on her patients, this is supported as she nicknamed the current patient Mr.G . To deal with Mr. G, Dr. Grant resorts to using all the skills she
...ave begged for her son and grandchildren life instead of trying save her life. The type of literary element shown here is conflict. The type of conflict that is shown is man versus man because the grandmother is constantly trying to convince someone in doing something else. It also shows conflict because the grandmother was begging for her life, but at the end that did not work because she ended up getting killed either way.
Almost doctors and physicians in the world have worked at a hospital, so they must know many patients’ circumstances. They have to do many medical treatments when the patients come to the emergency room. It looks like horror films with many torture scenes, and the patients have to pay for their pains. The doctors have to give the decisions for every circumstance, so they are very stressful. They just want to die instead of suffering those medical treatments. In that time, the patients’ family just believes in the doctors and tells them to do whatever they can, but the doctors just do something that 's possible. Almost patients have died after that expensive medical treatments, but the doctors still do those medical procedures. That doctors did not have enough confidence to tell the truth to the patients’ families. Other doctors have more confidence, so they explain the health condition to the patients’ families. One time, the author could not save his patient, and the patient had found another doctor to help her. That doctor decided to cut her legs, but the patient still died in fourteen days
From the beginning, the doctor was placed in a hostile situation where the family “[wasn’t] telling [the doctor] more than they had to,”(1) while Mathilda was “eating [him] up with her cold, steady eyes” with “no expression to her face whatever.” which is to be expected from a child towards a stranger. But she escalates extremely quickly when the doctor simply moves his chair up closer; she suddenly “claws instinctively for [the doctor’s] eyes.” This is her first attempt to resist the doctors help but the doctor just remains frank with Mathilda and...
To achieve this I wrote a short summary of the book in order to introduce the parenting aspect to people who perhaps had not read the book yet and to try to give an explanation to why Ben was the way he was instead of just describing him as evil. I have tried to keep a serious tone but not overly so, which could perhaps bore the readers/listeners and by using words such as neglect, stigmatised, freak, monster in order to capture the essence of the text and perhaps show how the projection of evil and the expectations of others can affect someone; I believe I have achieved this.
In contrast, syntax provides a new perspective to the narrator s behavior as sentence structure draws attention to her erratic behavior. By her last entry, the narrator s sentences have become short and simple. Paragraphs 227 through 238 contain few adjectives resulting in limited descriptions yet her short sentences emphasize her actions providing plenty of imagery. The syntax quickly pulls the reader through the end as the narrator reaches an end to her madness.
This freedom of choice, Gawande states, ultimately places a burden on either the doctor or the patient as the patient ultimately choose a course of treatment that is ultimately detrimental as in the case of Lazaroff, a patient with only a few weeks to live, but rather insist on “the day he would go back to work.” Despite the terrible risks and the limited potential benefits the neurosurgeon described, Lazaroff continued to opt to surgery and eventually died painfully as a result of surgery. Gawande suggests that Lazaroff “chose badly because his choice ran against his deepest interests,” which was to live despite his briefing remaining time, ultimately distorting his judgement into choosing a course of treatment that ultimately ended his life in a much more painful manner. Another case of patient decisions that Gawande discusses is Mr. Howe, who aggressively refused to be put on a breathing machine, neglecting the fact that “with antibiotics and some high-tech support...he would recover fully.” As Gawande and K awaited for Mrs. Howe’s decision to save her husband’s life, Mrs. Howe emotionally breaks down
...ns. Patients should not be so medically ill that they are unable to make this decision. Patients should be fully conscious and understand the implications of their decision. Everything should be documented possibly even videotaped that way the doctor doesn’t lose their job, receive a lawsuit or worst jail!
Mrs. A with her new born is at a pediatric clinic. She is been advised to vaccinate her baby for a disease X,Y, and Z. Mrs A has a discussion with Dr.D regarding the benefits of vaccines, possible side effects and why her baby needs to be vaccinated. She understands the benefits and the risks, but decides not to immunize her baby because she believes that her baby is not at risk of contractin...
As the story begins, the unnamed doctor is introduced as one who appears to be strictly professional. “Aas often, in such cases, they weren’t telling me more than they had to, it was up to me to tell them; that’s why they were spending three dollars on me.” (par. 3) The doctor leaves the first impression that he is one that keeps his attention about the job and nothing out of the ordinary besides stating his impressions on the mother, father and the patient, Mathilda. Though he does manage to note that Mathilda has a fever. The doctor takes what he considers a “trial shot” and “point of departure” by inquiring what he suspects is a sore throat (par. 6). This point in the story, nothing remains out of the ordinary or questionable about the doctor’s methods, until the story further develops.
“Sarah McMahon?” A woman opened the office door and called her. Sarah stood up and followed the woman. Sarah’s mom followed right behind her. “We’re just going to take your weight and the usual check ups.” The nurse said as she led them into a small room with a cushioned table with white paper strewn over it. They checked her weight, height, temperature, blood pressure and throat. “Very good.” The nurse said. She put Sarah’s record into a slot on the door. “The doctor will be with you in a minute.” She said as she closed the door.
at this dilemma with his family in mind, the doctor does not begin work on his
This is the story of a woman who allows her bitterness and resentment to take her along a pathway of pain and misery. I think the key to understanding this character is to analyze what we know about her past and apply it to her reactions to her present. Mathilde’s problems start even before the beginning of the story. Her obvious bitterness and di...
Mathilda lives on the same floor in an apartment building that Léon lives. When Mathilda's abusive father steals from a drug dealer, Stansfield, who is also the DEA agent, Mathilda's entire family is murdered in a very brutal assault at their apartment by the DEA /drug dealer team. Mathilda was not at home at the time but witnesses the results of the massacre as the team is still in the apartment searching for the drugs. She cleverly pretends to ignore the carnage in her own apartment as she passes by it and approaches Léon's apartment door. She begs him to open the door in a quiet, panicked voice several times as ...
...e upon a painful treatment the child is in no position to tell them otherwise. “According to a traditional Confucian interpretation, a child who agrees to a parent’s refusal of treatment would be violating the principle of filial piety” (Bowman). This makes the children very inactive in their own situation’s outcome. Therefore children and doctors do not have a very direct relationship and the communication is left to be between the older people of the patient’s family and the doctor resulting in a more technically based and advanced language.