Marriage as an institution must really be in serious trouble if spouses need to be drugged in order to make their marriage work.
According to James Hughes, a bioethicist at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut some drugs could help jump-start a failing marriage by heightening bonding and trust. Oxytocin helps increase trust, and vasopressin in particular seems to have a role in improved sexual health in marriage.
“The partners [who] try to improve their relationship should probably take doses of vasopressin while having sex, since it appears to increase the likelihood that a person will associate dopamine surges with a particular partner.” [McGill Daily]
In the first place, I have very serious reservations about the use of drugs to alter behavior. As far as I am concerned, that is only justified to control the behavior of the criminally insane or those with suicidal tendencies.
Secondly, marriage is a consensual act. In law, mutual consent is necessary not only at the moment of entering into marriage but all throughout the marriage. How can there be genuine consent if a spouse’s or both spouses’ behavior is drug induced? Bioethicist Thomas Murray puts it succintly when he says that “drug therapy could diminish or change the intrinsic value of relationships.”
Third, the relationship will have to be under the effective control of the “therapist” who will determine what drugs should be taken, when and what the dosage should be so as to prevent any effects associated with overdose. So, there’s a third party running the marriage. Shucks.
Sometimes, you know, the gimmicks that the drug industry resorts to just to sell their products… unbelievable.
{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }
Yoru 11.21.06 at 2:43 pm
Sana man lang ay maisip nung person na nag-subject sa partner nya to those drugs na sa kanya nakaka-insulto ang act na iyon and hindi sa partner nya. I think it’s pathetic to use such methods to keep a partner. Tsk tsk.
Connie 11.21.06 at 2:48 pm
“Nakaka-insulto” is a very nice way to describe it. Grabe.
Chizohu 11.21.06 at 11:01 pm
hi! am a pinoy rin can we exchange some links? am @ http://piatus.co.nr. your into cooking am into anime.interested? mail me then thnx.
brixter.co.nr
Avon Branch IT
Connie 11.22.06 at 3:55 am
No, thank you, Chizohu.
PHARMAGEEK 11.22.06 at 11:34 pm
Oxytocin is a hormone naturally produced by a woman to facilitate uterine contraction and induction of labor at term. Vasopressin is an anti diuretic medication for men with diabetes insipidus (not diabetes mellitus).
Both drugs are prescription injectibles here in the USA so tough luck for those looking for tablet and liquid forms.
I need not emphasize that the drugs, should they be clandestinely available, be properly administered to the right person?
Do i need to elaborate?
d0d0ng 11.23.06 at 3:02 am
…pardon my language, but the bioethicist is an idiot!
marriage is a contract…. if you take it at inception, it is void under influence of drugs.
unless, we wanted the fantasy world of a Barbie wife or Ken the robotic husband …. hehe
Connie 11.23.06 at 7:56 am
Pharmageek, you ask Do i need to elaborate?
What for? You have already regaled us with your knowledge about drugs. But you did NOT get the point raised in the entry. Do I need to elaborate?
Gloria 11.23.06 at 2:53 pm
i think that particular research is taking the wonders of drug (and science for that matter) too far.
real people in real marriages are not lab rats.
Pharmageek 11.23.06 at 4:59 pm
The end sentence ” Do I need to elaborate?” was misinterpreted.
What i was referring to was a situation where the drugs are interchanged and administered to the wrong person
In our industry, those drugs are called SALAD’s……….sound alike look alike drugs.
Fatal medication errors occur with SALADS.
My apologies if I did not get the point raised in your entry. I was more concerned with patient safety and immediately recognized the futility of the suggestion. Without knowledge of partner’s illness, hypersensitivity and diseases, the drug regimen could be “ethically challenging” to any prescriber.
By the way, dopamine levels can be increased in so many other ways other than drugs.
I guess i should not further elaborate , anuh?
Happy Thanksgiving Day to you and all !!!!! There is so much to be thankful today.
Ederic 11.23.06 at 5:29 pm
Drugs and marriage? Di nga bagay.
Naaliw naman ako sa sagutan ninyo ni Pharmageek. :p
Connie 11.23.06 at 5:49 pm
Pharmageek, I see nothing in your comment #5 that refers to patient safety so thanks for clarifying that. And thank you for lowering the caps on your name.
Gloria, the mere thought is insulting, di ba?
Ederic, intrigero ka ha! MWAHAHAHAHAHAA
Layla 11.24.06 at 8:37 am
if that’s the case, I’d be better off not married at all! I’d not bother looking for a partner after law school!
kidding aside, I think it’s insulting to both parties.
it’s like something out from Tristan and Isolde.
Tess 11.25.06 at 12:30 pm
Anyone who needs drugs just to keep a marriage intact is better off not being married at all. I understand Pharmageek’s comments. These drugs, though useful if utilized properly, are dangerous, as all manufactured drugs are. And we produce enough amounts of the hormones oxytocin and vasopressin so we need not to add to it. Marriage could be better enhanced if only the couple will see each other as respectable human beings.
d0d0ng 12.01.06 at 8:46 am
where world’s 1st class athletes are doping
boosting immunity of aids victim
fixing sexual dysfunctions
failing marriages are forgotten
welcome to the world of pill popping … bow
lu11bell 12.02.06 at 12:53 am
if you read the entire/complete article you will find that: “Using hormones and neurochemicals as an adjunct to marital counseling is simply a hypothetical application, although it could be applied today,†said Hughes.
However, actually administering a regimen of drug therapy in marriage counseling could be ethically challenging.
“It should be done consensually,†said Hughes. “No other possible problem comes to mind since the two chemicals have no known negative side effects.â€
Please include both sides of the conversation.
Thanks!
You may find the complete article: http://www.mcgilldaily.com/view.php?aid=5637
Connie 12.02.06 at 2:59 am
lu11bell, IF you read my entry you would know that the link you gave is already in the entry itself.
And you know why it\’s there? So that readers — like you — can read the article in its full and original context.
So what is the point of your comment now? To be redundant?
d0d0ng 12.02.06 at 3:56 am
connie - this drug thing is increasingly becoming a dilemma due to advancement in science.
we knew that aspirin is just a pain reliever or essentially masking the pain without addressing the source
see my inlaws are physicians, and if there is pain then they tell you why suffer which is a good point and tell you to take aspirin or painkiller.
society is evolving into a medicated society due to convenience, unlike in the past -no medicine-you die.
medicine is a big business, you can see a lot of ads of in the tv and i know my inlaws eyes roll upwards when you ask them about these new medicines…, not to mention 10 times side effects mentioned against a single cure as disclaimer.
the dilemma is how can you stop your family to discontinue treatment if you are a terminal patient hoping to die but not considered sane enough to get the message across….. i think i felt guilty of that with my father who passed away… i just couldn’t tell which is which for the best interest.
to relate to the article, how one can stop if there is court ordered marriage counseling and drug treatment to alter spouse behavior…. that is really scary in the future.
Connie 12.02.06 at 2:41 pm
d0d0ong, you said, “medicine is a big business.”
i think that explains everything. hence, my observation about “the gimmicks that the drug industry resorts to just to sell their products.”
drug companies have gotten into the habit of CREATING NEEDS — drugs for the need to lose weight, drugs for the need to cure impotence, drugs to sleep, stay awake, improve the appetite, kill the appetite…