besleybean wrote:

I have no information on army rules about health and engagement etc.  My husband's nephew was invalided out of the arny, he was a lot younger than John and only a lorry driver.
Where on Earth do you get the idea that the adrenalin junkie is not in aired BBC Sherlock?
That's the whole thrust of Sherlock's discussion wirh John ' back at 221b', once Mary has been exposed.
John is addicted to danger and dangerous people.

Well, the army is desperate for doctors; they really bend over backwards to recruit them, and they bend over backwards to try to keep them. As Belis has noted, John's limp isn't a problem for an army GP sitting at his desk; that isn't a reason for invaliding him out.

Lorry drivers, on the other hand, are easy to recruit and easy to replace; the army isn't going to hang on to someone with health problems.

And I didn't say that John is not an adrenaline junkie; what I said was that the unaired pilot showing a really macho man of action raises questions as to why, if he's that much of a macho man of action, he isn't still in the action. They backed away from going completely overboard with it because it's precisely the sort of question which would have been very obvious to anyone who knew anything about adrenaline junkies, and, indeed the action...




 

belis wrote:

Willow wrote:

If he likes it so much, why isn't he still there?

That's a good question. I have been pondering about that. Does John lacks self awaerness to the point that others need to tell him what he likes? Did he not know the score until Mycroft pointed out to him what he is missing? I doubt it. Or does he wants to appear 'normal' so much that he ignores that aspect of himself as he doesn't think it fits with image he has of himself? Maybe. Did he not have much choice as he was considered unfit for duty becouse of some other things that happaned? That seems likely explanation to me. Did he have enough of being an army doctor? I think there is a big difference between solving cases with Sherlock and patching up young men blown up to pieces in a war zone. I have never been to war. I have worked in AE though. There is an occassional excitement to it but for most of the time it is a long shift of a very hard work with many emotionally charged situations. If you add being shot at into the mix it may not be that appealing even for adrenalin junkie like John. There may have been something in particular about it that he simply can't face any more. Maybe he made a mistake. Maybe he just had one to many patients die in front of him despite his best efforts? There may be a reason why he prefers to work in GP land and not in AE on return to UK.

Yes; it seems likely to me that John got the chop for reasons that go beyond the limp and the shaking hand which stops shaking when he finds something interesting. His inability to control his violent impulses, his anger, his belief that someone is always blaming him, his unwillingness to face unpalatable facts, all contribute to a picture which suggests that, whatever else he is, he wasn't a good soldier. The military does its best to weed out people who cannot control their violent impulses, who cannot control their anger, because they are no use to them; that isn't what being a soldier is about.

Equally, the same conditions apply to being a good doctor; I accept that being a GP is far less stressful than being a hospital medic, but assaulting a patient because he thought it was Sherlock in disguise suggests that John really, really needs to sort himself out. As you have previously noted, therapy can only succeed if the patient works at it; John has to be prepared to make that effort. Frankly, I can't see Mary encouraging him to engage in therapy because she's happy with the John she's got...
 

Willow wrote:

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

belis wrote:

I think the dangers of crack dens are a bit over-rated. I have done 'house calls' to quite a few, knowingly and unknowingly, and came out in one piece somehow on each occasion.

Storming is where the problem is though. You wouldn't storm into person's house. The fact that it's a squat doesn’t make it any more OK. I think some pleasantries would have gone a long way will Billy and there would be no need for spraining him.

 

I thought it was interesting that even Sherlock looked at John and asked him, "Was that really neccesary?", implying that spraining Billy's arm was overkill. John was looking for a fight. 

But again, that whole sequence bugs me because it smacks of the US War On Drugs mentality that's permeated Hollywood for the past three decades... we've ah, kinda demonized users, so they aren't seen to deserve *any* rights, ever.  

 
I agree. I don't think we were supposed to admire John, however; the writers were making a point about John, not the addicts.

I have been disheartened to see so many initially promising fan fics disappearing into War on Drugs discourse; it's one of the more subtle flags for 'the writer doesn't know England', along with 'the writer wants to avoid mentioning John beating up Sherlock'.

Every so often I reread SusiGo's 'Choices' to cheer myself up

Yep. And it's not like there's a shortage of English people to ask! :-) 

I actually had a discussion with a fanfic writer friend of mine-- and her attitude towards addicts and users-- (and those two terms do not equate the same thing, btw) is that they are all evil victimizers waiting to suck the life out of everyone they meet and should at the very least ostracized from everyone's life. Just the fact of someone using makes them an addict, and therefore, they are someone to be demonized. And the truth is that, many, many people have been badly scarred by having to deal with an addict in their lives-- but I can't help but blame US policies for some of that. 
I think I've said this before, I have always thought England and European drug polices were a bit more mature than what I see here in the US, and was profoundly dissapointed to see what I saw as pandering to Hollywood morals about it. 

I've seen fanfics that have Sherlock as a full-blown Heroin addict, detoxing at 221B with nothing more than John's tough love and scolding, and maybe paracetamol--- which is cruel and inhumane. There is no reason to suffer like this, not anymore. That is so 1970-80's!

US/Hollywood approach to addiction= punishment in one way or another. 
England/European (some, not all) = closer to healing. 

Sorry, this is a thing with me....

Sherlock's drugs are under control, well at least more than John's issues are...

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

I've seen fanfics that have Sherlock as a full-blown Heroin addict, detoxing at 221B with nothing more than John's tough love and scolding, and maybe paracetamol--- which is cruel and inhumane. There is no reason to suffer like this, not anymore. That is so 1970-80's!

I have read plenty of those and my initial reaction was Oh my God as if. On the other hand though I'm not sure how keen Sherlock would be to actualy enrol in a programme to get a subsitute of one kind or another to take him through detox. I can see John ignoring the general rule that treating family and friends is a no no. However prescribing opietes would take that to a very different level. If you try to cash in a private presciption for controlled drugs it raises all sort of questions and will prompt the pharmacist to investigate and usualy refuse to dispence. Before you know it GMC is knowcking on the front door. So realistically I would maybe expect to offer a bit more in terms of symptomatic relief then paracetamol but not a formal detox regimen.
 

Last edited by belis (March 16, 2014 9:22 pm)

Ozymandias wrote:

Fanfics are often quite extreme with an oversensitive John who mothers Sherlock, and a oversensitive, ex-drug addict (or actual one), Sherlock who behaves like a REAL brat and deeply lacks of self-confidence. IMO, Sherlock is a very independant and proud person, who is well-aware of his boundaries. I can't imagine him as a a drug addict, I would probably imagine him using just to try it, or because he was bored (like in ACD stories).

Totally agree. Or, Sherlock might use on occasion, because he's simply curious. I can also buy the idea that he could have had a problem when he was younger-- but that doesn't *always* mean that the person is *still an addict.* But, I realize that my view on this might differ from others-- I just don't believe the dogmatic view, "Once an addict, always an addict", in the sense that people absolutley can't change and that they can't learn to employ some restraint in their lives ! I guess I'm a bit of  a weirdo. :-)