If the rights of the fetus take precedence over or are equal to the rights of the mother and the government should be charged with the responsibility of protecting those rights by legislation, then it is entirely possible that the government will one day decide what a pregnant woman can eat, drink, who can deliver her baby, where, when, how the delivery can take place and what kind of prenatal care she is to have, perhaps excluding chiropractic care. Scary thought huh?
Under Obama care the only mention of Chiropractic gives us parity with other health care providers and legislates much of what you mentioned above.
The solution to protecting the baby is not legislation but rather as Jerry Fawell stated back in the Reagan administration the choice is to not have sex and therefore avoid both the pregnancy and the STDs. I am amazed my mixer brothers are not proclaiming this wellness, natural solution to their patients…..
That, Dr. Hollensed, is a moral issue. Apparently our government does not want ot deal with moral issues any more than they want to deal with religious issues. But refusing to take a stand is itself a stand.
protecting rights and legislating what to eat and who to do business with are polar opposites, your proposal is most scary because of that fact.
Bob, we are quickly giving up our rights for “the greater good for the greater number”. The problem is that those making the decisions what is the greater good are ‘outside-in thinkers”.
Agree with Bob here. Not sure why you would make a comment like this Joe (other than to stir the pot). How is protecting the right to life of an unborn human “the greater good for the greater number?” It is as distinctly “individual” a matter as the matter gets.
Whew Eric! Are you actually reading this thread? Your comments don’t make sense! In fact, they are so twisted, I cannot even respond. Somebody help translate this for Eric!
Bob, I never presented this as a proposal but as a problem that faces the pro-life movement who are also chiropractors. When you turn over your freedom as a parent (to be) you open up a can of government worms. Restricting the rights of a pro-choice woman is a sword that cuts both ways. You misread my post and now look what you’ve done! You’ve got Eric on my back again. Was my original post that unclear?
Sorry Joe,
Here is my problem, I am pro life from a christian point of view, I believe abortion is wrong period.My belief is God has charged the state with civil justice, including the protection of life. The state often goes overboard in it’s duty and creates additional problems. I am a christian who happens to be a chiropractor, if in the course of the state legislating against abortion they over step there duty and then regulate the mother unreasonably I would still have to go with the basic protection of the unborn baby. People can live without chiropractic care.
I can see Dr. Strauss’ point of the double edge sword however I’m having a confused on one issue and having a tough time understanding how this is chiropractic.
Do all things that challenge the ADIO viewpoint, principle or philosophy warrant a chiropractors opinion?
I thought NTOSCtors simply LACVS for the full expression of innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body Period.
Where do NTOSCtors draw the line?
Could someone please clarify?
This involves the right of chiropractors to adjust pregnant women. Our freedom to do that is important to NTOSCors. Why do you think we battled the CCE for all those years. Do you think they care about a chiropractors right to adjust women through their pregnancy. Just because we only LACVS does not mean we stand around with our heads in the sand, especially when it involves our freedom to practice. It may not be part of the practice of chiropractic but it sure involves ADIO principles. Do you care whether you can adjust a pregnant woman. Do you care whether someone will take your child away from you because you check his/her spine? Are chiropractors not allowed to have opinions regarding freedom? If you’re not allowed to check a pregnant woman’s spine how do you LACVS.
Dr. Strauss,
I was simply asking if it is a part of the practice of chiropractic.
I did not interpret it as a threat to the freedom to practice and I wasn’t insinuating I didn’t care. I suppose I am as guilty as others on this thread that have misinterpreted the intent of your original post.
Do you care whether you can adjust a pregnant woman. …yes
Do you care whether someone will take your child away from you because you check his/her spine? …certainly..yes
Are chiropractors not allowed to have opinions regarding freedom?…As it relates to chiropractic..yes.
If you’re not allowed to check a pregnant woman’s spine how do you LACVS?..you can’t.
You are correct Don, it is not part of the practice of chiropractic but there are issues that affect us as human beings, freedom loving citizens living in a democratic republic, yes even as christians and we need to address them especially as they tangentially affect chiropractic. Here is an example from my history: I never tell PMs not to have their children vaccinated… that’s not part of the practice of chiropractic. But some years ago I was asked to help write an amicus curiae brief to get chiropractic PMs’ children exempted from forced school vaccination. I did that and even quoted Stephenson in the brief. The Pa asst. AG ruled in our favor, quoted my input and many of my PMs who chose not to have their children vaccinated still use that AG’s decision when harrassed by school authorities. That was long before I practiced NTOSC [yes Eric, I was once an uninformed TSC before I saw the light :)] and I have not thought about it (in relationship to NTOSC) since then but I think I would do it again.(I’d have to reread what I wrote and see if it is still NTOSC philosophically sound).
Dr. Strauss,
Again, I am not insinuating anything.
If you “never tell PMs not to have their children vaccinated… that’s not part of the practice of chiropractic”. How can your position to help with vaccination exemption be “NTOSC philosophically sound”?
How can it be NTOSC philosophically sound if it is not chiropractic?
Did you mean ADIO philosophically sound?
Again Don, that incident, helping to write the brief, occurred before I was NTOSC, when I was still TSC. You’re correct, it probably was not. Things change as we understand more of the NTOSC philosophy. We also must distinguish between ADIO philosophy and NTOSC. NTOST is ADIO but all ADIO is not NTOSC. Vaccination is an ADIO issue but it is not NTOSC.
Joe,
As you say, your NTOSC protocols limit your patient interactions to the LACVS. Yet your overlying philosophy is ADIO. And you say that issues like whether to take drugs, vaccinate or eat “good” foods can be addressed from an ADIO perspective. Who besides chiropractors have the ADIO perspective when it comes to such things? And if it is distinctly or predominantly a chiropractic perspective…then who is there other than chiropractors to educate the public about such things?
Eric,
Many have an ADIO perspective on vaccination, nutrition, exercise, etc. who are not chiropractors. Teach people that perspective so that they have the knowledge to seek out the right person. Stephenson talks about this (the ADIOviewpoint) in his Articles on nutrition,diet, exercise, etc. It is arrogant to think that we are the only ones with an ADIO world and life viewpoint. In fact most chiros probably don’t have one. We should teach people the ADIO viewpoint about chiropractic (heaven knows there are a lot of chiropractors teaching the outside-in viewpoint). In doing that they learn to look at health from an ADIO viewpoint, which leads to looking at life because health is a part of life and hopefully they will begin to have an ADIO W&L viewpoint in every area of life.
The way I see it, we are all in a state of transition. You are not alone. Thank you for clarifying Dr. Strauss.
Could you elaborate or give some examples to help me understand the latter half of your statement?
“NTOST is ADIO but all ADIO is not NTOSC”
Thanks,
You’re welcome, Don and please call me Joe.
There is an ADIO viewpoint of life. It has certain characteristics which seperates it from an outside-in one. In theology they refer to it as Divine Viewpoint as opposed to human viewpoint. Examples: of ADIO treating disease therapeutically (eg.Medicine) is outside-in. Restoring health (eg. eating good food) is ADIO. Exercising to lose weight is outside-in, to be healthy is ADIO (you can see both groups at the gym, the former has a goal, the latter a lifetime endeavor). Putting criminals in prison is outside-in, changing their heart is ADIO. Legislation that forces the government’s will on people is outside-in, that which creates greater freedom is ADIO. I think, just from our discussions thus far, that you could recognize an ADIO viewpoint on just about any subject as opposed to a human/outside-in one. All of the above have nothing to do with NTOSC but they are ADIO. I have an e-book called Conflict of Philosophy that goes into all this, only 20 chapters finished thus far.
Joe,
I suppose we cannot presume to know with absolute certainty whether chiropractors represent the bulk of the ADIO thinkers in the “healthcare marketplace” – but I would wager that of the tiny minority in the world that do have this perspective, the majority are in fact chiropractors. From what I have observed, this ADIO lifestyle thing is our cross to bear. Of course we can chose not to pick it up.
Eric,
I’m not sure that the bulk of chiropractors represent ADIO thinking! I think most only give it lipservice. Further, I think the majority of the world are what the greek calls dipsychos, translated doubleminded. In some ways they are ADIO thinkers and in other areas they are outside-in thinkers. I never thought of it as a “cross to bear”. I thank God every day that He showed me the light. ADIO thinking in every area of my life has made it richer, fuller and more satisfying. I believe that is one thing we can agree upon.
Joe,
I guess what I meant is the massive effort associated with getting the ADIO understanding through the thick skulls “dipsychos”, and other fully or partially outside-in programmed humanoids is “our cross to bear”. The fact that we live our own lives this way is indeed a blessing. On that we can agree. This may be the second time we have agreed on “something”. Would you like to take the credit?
Actually, the fact that we agree makes me want to give it a second thought!:)
I think I just shed a tear……:)
I knew you guys could do it!
however I’m confused on one issue and having a tough time understanding how this is chiropractic.
Fine Joe. However I think you mixed oil and water in your wording. Government meddling and “right to life” – not the same gyration.
Agreed.
Again, Eric, I have no idea what you are saying. The purpose of government is to protect the rights of its citizens. If we think the government should protect the right of the unborn how can we be opposed to how they choose to do it…even if it takes away the right of the parent to have that unborn child “under chiropractic care”? The original title of this post was “The conundrum of the pro-life movement” I changed it in keeping with Independence Day (freedom). Perhaps that caused the confusion. If outlawing abortion is not meddling, then outlawing prenatal chiropractic care ( which we all would disagree with) cannot be meddling…. in both cases we are giving the govenment the right to intercede. So far no one has come up with a Solomonic solution which is what I was hoping for. Of course the answer is people understanding what life is, where it comes from and what chiropractic is. Until and unless that happens we can very likely be faced with this scenerio, given the outside-in bent of the government.
Citizenship begins at conception Joe.
Sorry, I am usually very conservative in what I post on this blog but recently I saw something from a regulatory college that felt the need to list the following practices that are outside of the scope of chiropractic. I felt I need to share this and get some input.
mobile digital
iriscope system, dark field
microscopy, vega testing,
hyperbaric oxygen therapy, pelvic
and prostate examinations
Please tell me I’m not alone in my surprise. I don’t even have a clue what the first few of these are!
Not familiar with those procedures except for the hyperbaric oxygen therapy. We use it on occasions in the office….kidding! One of our PMs is an MD who does it at a local hospital. Actually, i don’t even know what a “regulatory college” is.
I believe a regulatory college is the Canadian equivalent to the Pennsylvania State Board of Chiropractors. They are charged with determining standards of practice that all chiropractors must follow in order to maintain a license to practice.
Don,
YOU are correct!!! 😉
http://www.cco.on.ca
That is one. There are many.
11 to be exact.
Here is a link:
http://www.chiropracticcanada.ca/en-us/AboutUs/ChiropracticInCanada/LicensingRegulations/ProvincialLicensingOffices.aspx