I started the clinical medical assistant program last week, and am already learning a lot about the medical field. Predictably, it's much more hands-on than history is. Since history involves the study of human behavior through the lens of past events, there is much focus on cause and effect, theories (Darwinism, postmodernism, etc.), historic movements, historiography, and other related topics. There isn't much interaction with historic figures, so interaction in history means discussing ideas with your peers about events. The work is solely mental, and room is left for speculation about the reasons things happened or are happening. So far, medicine seems to involve memorization and the ability to communicate clearly and with respect for the other party. Medically, you learn how to respond to an emergency and how to take vital signs; but with regard to human interaction, you learn how to interact with different cultures so as to remove as many roadblocks to communication as possible, with the goal of helping them communicate their medical needs. While history could be very isolating, clinical medical assisting is far more interactive. History suited me because I'm an introvert. We'll see how I respond to the need for heavy interaction. Being a teacher will help in that respect, I know, but even teaching allows a certain distance between teacher and student. Clinical medical assisting is different, so much so that I'm calling this program a test to see whether medicine is appropriate for me.
I read part of a poem recently by one of my favorite poets. It reads: I envy not in any moods The captive void of noble rage The linnet born within the cage That never knew the summer woods. I envy not the beast that takes His license in the field of time Unfetter'd by the sense of crime To whom a conscience never wakes. Nor what may call itself as bles't The heart that never plighted troth But stagnates in the weeds of sloth Nor any want-begotten rest. I hold it true, whate'er befall I feel it, when I sorrow most 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. At base, Tennyson contrasted a life of risk, and consequent pain, with one of security. He sides conclusively with the life of risk, and says he fails to envy those who have faced no hardship. I agree with him; and, for good or ill, his words are just as relevant today as they were in the nineteenth century. Like then, there are those today who choose to live their lives with as little risk as...
Comments
Post a Comment