The other night, I had a nightmare that I was going to be restrained by my neck and I kept yelling, “You can’t! I had surgery! I had cancer! That’s illegal! It’s in violation of the Geneva Convention!” and I woke up with a start, gasping and quivering in fear. “The Geneva Convention.” I mumbled to myself.”In violation…”
What’s in violation of the Geneva Convention, dear reader? Torture.
I have doubts and questions and fears about my follow up, about the ever present tiny Tg and my recently doubled TgAb, the massive reliance on ultrasound. I previously instructed myself to put it on the shelf and not look at it again until June. Pending those results, I would then seek a second opinion if I continued to feel uncomfortable. Some days I can do this, and others I cannot. Seeking that second opinion right now feels premature, and there’s the loaded question of who I would get it from.
Dr. Overinvolved is one of the few people I listen to and believe when he gives me his opinion. Part of the issue is I don’t trust my doctors. Him, I do, and I do because he’s real; his over involvement helped me in a myriad of ways. He was in my corner and I knew it. No one else did that for me. There’s also the dark-ish side of his over involvement and those intense emotions between us. Transference never dies. Not to mention, he is not the most well-qualified specialist I could consult with. But I trust him and he knows the history, including why I find this so upsetting (hint: it’s not depression). That may be more important to me than the actual medical situation.
I also have other less than noble reasons for considering him. I want him to know how this has turned out. He said I was cured and that mets were theoretically impossible. That’s not what the blood work says. None of this hurts him no matter how over involved he may or may not have been. It is still my life being sullied by this and that will not change if he learns of this turn of events.
The alternative is to consult with someone I do not know who is infinitely more qualified. The trust issues could remain, or it might settle them down if this opinion is in agreement with the current one. However, my trust issues go much deeper than my PTSD from the original surgery and treatment. I was at another medical center prior to this one, and it is that medical center that instilled the doubt that has laid out this course I have been on for the last six years. Is it wise, then, to throw another new ingredient into the mix? I like the idea of seeing Dr. Overinvolved because he’s not a new ingredient. I like the idea of seeing someone brand new because there is much less bias involved. I must be clear; I do not believe my treatment by Dr. Overinvolved was compromised. I think he made some claims he should not have, but everything else he did was right on.
The torture, then, is not knowing what to do, who to turn to, and who to believe in as much as it is being in this position in the first place. I remain partially submerged under layers of questions and doubts about the clinical course not taken with my next move not at all clear.