The tweet said:
Peebles cites @lauracollinslm on importance of parents' awareness of "getting your kid back" as marker of recovery #sahm15
I was delighted, as it is always nice to know that someone thinks well of what I believe, and say. I tweeted back that I was flattered.
Then, because these things happen in public and everyone is entitled to an opinion, someone said:
@drmuhlheim @LauraCollinsLM a good suggestion but very parent focused outcome. Patient centred outcomes?
Which, of course, this tweeter has the right to say.
But, what is up with the "BUT?"
It reminds me of many such debates where advocacy for any good thing can be taken two ways. One: as a simple positive. Or, as taking away from someone else.
Advocating for breastfeeding gets taken as an attack on those who don't or can't. Advocating for women is seen as not caring about men. Early intervention advice is seen as injury to the chronically ill.
Why is a positive so often seen as taking away from others?
There is no LOSS to patients when parents are part of the equation here. In fact, an empowered and hopeful parent is an important and often pivotal asset to recovery. It would never occur to me to even think that parents looking to full recovery would be in any way NOT a "patient-centred" outcome. It is ABOUT the patient. The patient's best interests are also the family's best interest. But that is the way some people think. It makes me sad. We are all on the same side.