« And you thought he was conservative | Main | On Fire »
May 05, 2005
In the House
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
The one and only time on the show that House ever followed a rule and it's to not tell the parents their 12 year old was having an abortion.
Posted by: Dan at May 5, 2005 1:28:19 PM
Dan
That's true. I mean, just the other week House was accepting cars from criminals, and lying to people to help cover up the fact that a patients illness stemmed from his homosexual conduct.
What exactly did the show present as the problem being caused by her pregnancy?
Posted by: David R. at May 5, 2005 2:48:21 PM
"Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura" (TTP)
Posted by: Dan at May 5, 2005 3:01:11 PM
Yes, House didn't break the rules and tell the parents, but it was clear that the scenario was raising a lot of questions for him. From his conscious, purely medical perspective OF COURSE she should have an abortion. Yet there was a suggestion that the whole event was making him stop and think about how the heck it has ever gotten to this point AND that he has an awareness that it is "correct" perspectives such as he has had that are responsible. Anyway, no answers, but a lot of uneasy questions.
Posted by: annie t. at May 5, 2005 3:34:04 PM
Dan
I did a websearch and came up with this short note about a woman that was treated so that she went into enough of a remission that her baby was carried to term and delivered by C-section. I guess this means that the woman in House was not responding to any of these treatments?
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/140/7/981
Posted by: David R. at May 5, 2005 4:22:56 PM
In the show--House assumes that the girl is pregnant by another teenager and never questions that the Coach might be the father--how crazy is this?
House makes a suggestion to the girl that maybe at a party they play Spin the Bottle and things went too far. The girl just looks away and says "he was a jerk"
House, who is always noisy and curious---is suddenly completely uninterested in who the father could be.
Posted by: Momma K at May 5, 2005 6:09:08 PM
Okay...IT'S A TV SHOW!!! Hello! "House" is a character, not a real person.
Sorry, but inserting these reminders is a knee-jerk reaction from talking to too many rabid Tolkien fans.
I don't think House has ever broken an actual state law before. He's ignored plenty of ethical and in-house hospital rules, but I'm not sure he's broken this kind of law before, but I could be wrong because, while I like the show in general, I'm not hanging on every detail.
I think it was very obvious that he went as far as he could with the parents while still staying inside the law. If I were a parent and he were a real doctor, his attitude would be setting off a gazillion red flags. He also didn't coddle the girl. He made it pretty clear to her that she darned well ought to tell her parents, and she did.
The storyline of the show wasn't about sexual abuse. The writers didn't write it that way. That's why "House" (a character created by writers) didn't wonder if the coach was the father. He's not real, remember? He's a creation. Of writers. Who write fiction. Which can be loosely defined as "making stuff up".
Posted by: JM at May 6, 2005 8:01:01 AM
Dear JM--
And the DaVinci Code is "just a book" "Its not real" it is "fiction"
In both cases, "House" and "DaVinci Code" a troubling adgenda is being forwarded.
Posted by: Momma K at May 6, 2005 8:56:18 AM
So don't read/watch them.
No agenda was pushed on "House". The facts are indeed that his character could not, under existing law, reveal the details of the girl's abortion to her parents. The show did not take a side. The show was written to indicate that this law is a troubling thing. It did not take sides at all.
And it really is just a ficitonal TV show. That's all. As the DaVinci Code is just a book. A work of fiction.
Will there always be some people who take fiction a little too seriously? Yes. So what? You can remind them that it's fiction and not fact and that if the fiction has piqued their curiosity about factual things, they need to locate reliable, factual sources to research further, but after that, there's not much you can do. You can't expect people who write fiction to start tailoring their work to cater to the stupid, ignorant and pedantic among us.
Also, I often find that people who cry "agenda!" about things like this are really just upset that their agenda wasn't pushed. It's not that they want a show without an agenda (like "House" was this week). It's that they do indeed want a show with an agenda, but only if that agenda is the one they're rooting for.
BTW - my post wasn't all that serious. It was in response to your question why the character didn't begin an investigation into the possibility of sexual abuse. The reason is because the writers didn't want to write it that way. That's all. It wasn't part of a secret liberal conspiracy to advocate for sexual relations between adults and children. It was because the writers wrote a different story.
Of course, you can write any story you want, try to get it published or sold to a production company/network/studo, and include anything you want - any agenda, any storyline, any character, anyfrickin'thing at all. Isn't that great? And you know what else - you can do it in your pyjamas while eating leftover cold pizza and flat Diet Coke! I highly recommend it as a career choice. Enjoy.
Posted by: JM at May 6, 2005 9:29:59 AM
