What a week. Most notably, I am still in a state of partial disbelief that my case with Blue Cross Blue Shield is now on a path toward resolution and I don’t have do battle with them, or at least in the same vigorous, soul-crushing way I have been engaged in since May (they still have not paid all the bills but at least part of them are resolved).
But the very same day that I received the good news about BCBS, I received not so good news from my dermatologist about the black-blue mole that lies right under my left eye. He wants it gone, removed.
So my whole fight with BCBS concerned claims over pre-existing conditions related to my moles. My claim was that I never had a problem with them until I had BCBS insurance and that is indeed the case. Soon after I first started having problems, I went on mole patrol and found a suspicious mole on my sister, which turned out to be melanoma. Now whenever I see a dermatologist, they all say, given my family history, given I grew up in the tropics, and given the odd size and very dark color of my mole, that it has to go. In fact the last dermatologist said with the firmest of tones: “there is no doubt in my mind that it must be removed.”
The words stung because, well, I am pretty attached to the mole. I have lived with it for my whole life and it is fundamentally, even if somewhat mysteriously, linked to my sense of self. If it goes, I would feel like a very important part of me would also vanish.
On more prosaic grounds, I can’t help think that part of the drive to remove such a spot is just part of somewhat unhealthy social trend toward measuring most everything in finer and finder gradations of risk. Given that this mole is on my face and I see my face at least 2x a day in the mirror, I would probably catch anything if it started to change but given our “risk society” it is unsurprising that every American dermatologist keeps saying it is time to bid adieu to it. Given my background in medical anthropology I can’t help conceptualize all this advice within these much larger social trends and then I go back and forth endlessly in my head as to whether I should remove it because it is safe and right and sound or whether I am caving in to somewhat irrational trend toward the risk management of everything.
Finally I fear my insurance company again. Though I have a good job and decent insurance, I may not have good enough insurance for what this procedure entails.
Because of the size and location of the mole (large and close to my eye), if removed it must be done by a plastic surgeon. And plastic surgery in the US and plastic surgery in NYC costs a very pretty penny. While I would plan on getting pre-approval for the surgery, I somehow have the feeling that they will not pay the full cost and I am going to be left with another bill. And I am trying to stop the unnecessary onslaught of bills.
So should it stay or should it go? I bet that I will lean toward the latter but not without a lot more thoughts, internal cries of resistance, and sense that even if I decide it is the best thing, I will lose a small piece of myself once removed…
If it were me, I would remove it.
Comment by mako — October 26, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
Risks of removing it: you might look different to yourself and others, and you might have survived anyway (but you’ll never know).
Risks of not removing it: you might suffer and/or die from a serious medical condition.
I have trouble understanding the attachment to something like that. How can appearance in any way matter compared to health?
Comment by Anonymous — October 26, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
I think if your dermatologist is so adamant about removing it, he should be able to come up with some sort of argumentation in support of doing so. If it is indeed “risk management”, you should be able to sense that from his arguments; and the risk is yours to assess, nobody elses. Really, an unsubstantiated claim like the quote in your post just isn’t an argument; If they can’t come up with something more solid than that, I personally wouldn’t worry about it too much.
Because, you know, it does look good on you.
Comment by Wouter Verhelst — October 26, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
As Wouter suggests, it would be good to determine if the doc is saying ‘it would be better if you did so’ vs. ‘it is necessary within a reasonable timeframe’. And then to determine the risks and complications of whatever procedure is considered. Most docs say that most medical conditions do not progress fast enough to not allow for a short break to consider alternatives. So think about it, get your opinion (and maybe a second), think about it again, then act. moles come and go, but there is only one biella
Besides, on irc or even secondlife, it can be imagined that its still there.
pax vobiscum
Comment by Kevin Mark — October 26, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
I completely understand your hesitation in removing something that has been a part of you your whole life plus going through a risky and expensive procedure when you don’t have any direct indication that you would ever have a problem. I would get a second opinion.
Comment by Raquel — October 27, 2007 @ 4:18 am
you should get a second opinion when you go to PR – health care is way cheaper there… and i know a really good dermatologist there i could recommend…
Comment by yari — October 27, 2007 @ 9:49 am
While I’m not going to say you should not get it removed, I do empathize and think you should definately weigh in what your mole means to you. People make lots of decisions about personal identity that goes against their rational interests. I would get a clear understanding of the risks and scenarios involved and then make the decision. We all make life and death tradeoffs all the time based on things that don’t have value to anyone but ourselves, so I say just make sure you are clear in what the scope of the decision is.
Comment by h0mee — October 27, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
And just to add a small example… Lots of people told me in the past, when I was young I should cut my hair because it would affect my social standing with high powered people, and that I would always be an outsider if I kept long hair…. That may have been true, but so what? Death comes to everyone (except extropians), and there is a lot of room in the middle to thrive, so I think it’s better to make sure that the death isn’t long, drawn out, or painful… Or alternatively a sudden young swift death..
Comment by h0mee — October 27, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
A story:
My friend Ben got married and changed his last name. Before doing it, he felt a little trepidation: how would it be suddenly having a different name than the one he’d had all his life? Wouldn’t it feel a little bit… wrong?
Then after he did it, he said he woke up the next morning and realized it meant *nothing* at all. Nothing had changed. He was the same person, same problems, same joys, same brain, same body. The name was just a label. He described it as kind of a liberating experience, albeit a minor one.
I know a name isn’t quite the same as a facial feature you’ve had all your life, but I think there’s something to be learned from Ben’s experience. You’ll still be the same person the next day. No one will treat you any differently, you won’t feel different… it’ll sort of be “Oh, Biella, didn’t you used to wear glasses?” or “Did you cut your hair?”, stuff like that. People may notice something is different, but they may not even know what.
Go for it. You are not your mole!
Comment by Karl Fogel — October 30, 2007 @ 7:18 pm
Dont go chasing waterfalls
Please stick to the rivers and the lakes that
Youre used to
I know that youre gonna have it your way
Or nothing at all
But I think you re moving too fast
I say, lose the mole, but have them leave a big, jagged scar in its place. It’s win-win.
I’ve picked up a nice scar myself, though I can’t say I’d miss it if it went away: http://ui07.gamespot.com/390/ziiperarm.jpg
Comment by Looby — November 21, 2007 @ 8:06 am