In contrast to Synofzik’s viewpoints, David Degrazia is against using drugs for enhancement. Degrazia starts off his article with a very clear definition of what he thinks enhancement is. He states, “interventions designed to improve human form or functioning beyond what is necessary to sustain or restore good health. Often, enhancements are understood as interventions to produce improvements in human form or function that do not respond to genuine medical needs” (Degrazia, 2000). He feels that an enhancement is going above and beyond what the basic needs of the patient are. Degrazia sees something like heart medication as a treatment, but something like caffeine would be an enhancement. This definition is extremely important because it is
…show more content…
Marina is a patient who, do to certain circumstances in her childhood and early experiences, has occasional brooding thoughts about death and has obsessive tendencies, but is otherwise relatively happy. Based on Degrazia’s definition, giving Marina Prozac would be enhancement. This is because not only was Marina not diagnosed with a mental illness, but she is also using the Prozac as a “shortcut” for self-improvement. She wants to use cosmetic psychopharmacology to make herself more socially attractive, more confident, and more energetic. These results have been seen in patients who take Prozac who are not suffering from depression. Degrazia feels that using Prozac is taking away life’s authenticity. Authenticity comes from introspection and being true to one’s self. It can also come from facing challenges and feelings of sadness and dealing with them. Taking Prozac saves someone from dealing with the hard parts of life. He views taking Prozac as a way to get around doing these sometimes challenging things. It is important to note that the doctors surveyed in Hotze et al. 2011 article agree with Degrazia. The majority of them agree that human suffering has …show more content…
They both understand that the habit is not good for them, both spend a lot of money on the habit, and both see the habit as inconvenient at times. One woman finds the habit out of character. The other woman enjoys being contrarian to what people believe is good. The latter of the two women “owns” the personality traits so it becomes part of who she is. The difference comes from different value systems. The use of psychopharmaceuticals can only take away personality traits that we “own”. Retaining your personality and what makes you human is extremely important to Degrazia. He brings up many points about how psychopharmaceuticals can and cannot take away your personality or what it means to you to be human. A point that the author brings up that the other philosophers do not is the availability of these drugs. A 30 day supply of generic Prozac can cost up to 50 dollars depending on the pharmacy. Not everyone can afford to pay that price every month. People that are insured, may have plans that only cover prescriptions for psychiatric medications when one has a diagnosable illness. This can create a gap between different socioeconomic groups, since the relatively wealthy can pay out of pocket. Cosmetic psychopharmacology is likely to benefit mainly those who can pay the bill and are already well off. This raises issues of social and economic fairness. Taking away
Marina is a patient who, do to certain circumstances in her childhood and early experiences, has occasional brooding thoughts about death and has obsessive tendencies, but is otherwise relatively happy. Based on Degrazia’s definition, giving Marina Prozac would be enhancement. This is because not only was Marina not diagnosed with a mental illness, but she is also using the Prozac as a “shortcut” for self-improvement. She wants to use cosmetic psychopharmacology to make herself more socially attractive, more confident, and more energetic. These results have been seen in patients who take Prozac who are not suffering from depression. Degrazia feels that using Prozac is taking away life’s authenticity. Authenticity comes from introspection and being true to one’s self. It can also come from facing challenges and feelings of sadness and dealing with them. Taking Prozac saves someone from dealing with the hard parts of life. He views taking Prozac as a way to get around doing these sometimes challenging things. It is important to note that the doctors surveyed in Hotze et al. 2011 article agree with Degrazia. The majority of them agree that human suffering has …show more content…
They both understand that the habit is not good for them, both spend a lot of money on the habit, and both see the habit as inconvenient at times. One woman finds the habit out of character. The other woman enjoys being contrarian to what people believe is good. The latter of the two women “owns” the personality traits so it becomes part of who she is. The difference comes from different value systems. The use of psychopharmaceuticals can only take away personality traits that we “own”. Retaining your personality and what makes you human is extremely important to Degrazia. He brings up many points about how psychopharmaceuticals can and cannot take away your personality or what it means to you to be human. A point that the author brings up that the other philosophers do not is the availability of these drugs. A 30 day supply of generic Prozac can cost up to 50 dollars depending on the pharmacy. Not everyone can afford to pay that price every month. People that are insured, may have plans that only cover prescriptions for psychiatric medications when one has a diagnosable illness. This can create a gap between different socioeconomic groups, since the relatively wealthy can pay out of pocket. Cosmetic psychopharmacology is likely to benefit mainly those who can pay the bill and are already well off. This raises issues of social and economic fairness. Taking away