ext_8839 (
bedawyn.livejournal.com) wrote in
house_wilson_ghc_reqs2008-05-11 06:07 pm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
(no subject)
Anyone know of a good, medically believable, in-character story set between the infarction and the pilot that explains why House would allow himself to become addicted in the first place to a drug that he knows is going to poison his liver, if it's not because the drug provides some medical value not otherwise (less dangerously) available? Or even decent meta to that effect? I've just read one too many stories based on the premise that if House just stops taking narcotics, everything will be hunkydory. And I'm trying not to rant, but they never explain the reasoning behind the premise, and they never convince me it's true, and they never explain what he's doing instead for pain management (other than Wilson's luuuurvve) and the whole otherwise-well-written story gets ruined for me because of that one little detail. But so many well-respected authors ascribe to this theory, there must be some rationale for it somewhere. I don't need to be permanently convinced, but please, someone give me at least enough of an explanation that I can read these stories without wanting to strangle the authors. There must be some fic, somewhere, that explains their perspective?
[Edited to add: Okay, guys, I'd really enjoy reading this thread as just an observer. It's great to know that so many people get het up in agreement with me. But that's the thing -- you're agreeing with me. I feel like I'm being asked to defend a position I don't hold, a position that I said just above makes me want to strangle the authors who promote it. That's why I asked for recs, for something that would explain what they're thinking, because I sure as heck don't understand it myself, much less agree with it.]
[Edited to add: Okay, guys, I'd really enjoy reading this thread as just an observer. It's great to know that so many people get het up in agreement with me. But that's the thing -- you're agreeing with me. I feel like I'm being asked to defend a position I don't hold, a position that I said just above makes me want to strangle the authors who promote it. That's why I asked for recs, for something that would explain what they're thinking, because I sure as heck don't understand it myself, much less agree with it.]