HOPE PART 5

Impediments[edit]
There are two main arguments based on judgement against those who are advocates of using hope
to help treat severe illnesses. The first of which is that if physicians have too much hope, they may
aggressively treat the patient. The physician will hold on to a small shred of hope that the patient
may get better. Thus, this causes them to try methods that are costly and may have many side
effects. One physician noted[30] that she regretted having hope for her patient; it resulted in her
patient suffering through three more years of pain that the patient would not have endured if the
physician had realized recovery was infeasible.
The second argument is the division between hope and wishing. Those that are hopeful are actively
trying to investigate the best path of action while taking into consideration the obstacles.
Research[26] has shown though that many of those who have "hope" are wishfully thinking and
passively going through the motions, as if they are in denial about their actual circumstances. Being
in denial and having too much hope may negatively impact both the patient and the physician.

Benefits[edit]
The impact that hope can have on a patient's recovery process is strongly supported through both
empirical research and theoretical approaches. However, reviews of literature also maintain that
more longitudinal and methodologically sound research is needed to establish which hope
interventions are actually the most effective, and in what setting (i.e. chronic illness vs. terminal
illness).[29]