Do psychiatrist start concierge style practices?

[rama kandra]

That is because healthcare does not run on supply/demand, as it would if there was transparency and deregulation. Instead we have a very political climate with many parties with vested interests and backing. Insurance, government and various laws have prevented free market medicine. People generally are against the idea that capital (medical capital) is best served by supply/demand - which is why there is little sense in healthcare. It pays well of course, but that isn't the point anymore.

Unionization is a bad idea because it does not accomplish the outcome correctly - higher wages at the expense of further political strong arming and policy do not make me likely to join one. Instead if the population grows and doctors are not expanding due to AAMC policy, the outcome is a disaster. Now they have started to act but this is still far from the ideal.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

That is because healthcare does not run on supply/demand, as it would if there was transparency and deregulation. ....

There is more to it than that though. We are understandably squeamish about having people die. If I can't afford a house in a nice neighborhood, I can live in a bad neighborhood, or rent in a worse neighborhood, or a fleabag hotel. If I can't afford a 4 star restaurant, I can go to McD's. If I can't afford a Lexus, I can buy a used Yugo. If I need a bone marrow transplant, spinal fusion, or a coronary bypass, or insulin... There is no cheaper "Free market" alternative.

 

[billypilgrim37]

If I need a bone marrow transplant, spinal fusion, or a coronary bypass, or insulin... There is no cheaper "Free market" alternative.

Sure there is! Heroin!

 

[OldPsychDoc]

Sure there is! Heroin!

Wow--it all comes together now. Death panels, war in Afghanistan....

Care for some tea, billy?

 

[whopper]

Why primary care is not considered sexy, or gets such low pay makes me believe it is not running on the capitalist model.

Another problem is that culturally, several types of patients don't want their true problem solved. They only want the quick fix.

I have a subset of patients that are upset by me when I recommend they stop smoking, lose weight, exercise, and are given homework assignments such as filling out a CBT-style checklist to see if their symptoms are improving. Mind you, I only make a serious stop smoking recommendation after the patient is reasonably stabilized (e.g. a GAF of 70 or over). Below that, I'll say I think they should stop smoking, but I want them to be on top of their more serious problems first.

Many of them just want a pill.

I've stated this before, but a major element of the healthcare problem that IMHO no one is pushing is that people need to take responsibility over their own health. Some studies suggest that the savings to the system would be in the hundreds of billions of dollars if America's obesity level were trimmed.

http://www.endocrinetoday.com/view.aspx?rid=35574

IMHO, if someone smokes, does nothing to treat his high cholesterol and high blood pressure, and has the capacity to understand that he is doing things detrimental to his health, he ought to pay more for his healthcare. I'm not suggesting people with conditions they can't help (e.g. Huntington's) be put in this category.

Which is why I've been hesitant to support any of the recent proposals to fix the system. Some people, you offer them more services, and they just use more and more with little real improvement.

 

[rama kandra]

Right thats all pretty common sense stuff. I don't need a study to show me that. I'm already smarter than most people so I have to skip to the solution - primary care physicians should be rewarded for their services. Because they aren't it makes me believe there is something inherently wrong in the model. These are doctors in demand, have busy practices and serve many patients over many years and yet oddly, a once domineering profession in medicine is now second rate?

Forget the anecdotes and subjectivity, primary care gets no respect and no reward. If people want to change healthcare they need to make primary care the sexy profession it used to be in America. Now tell me a pediatricians services are not useful for 21 years of a patients life, not busy, or providing services that are necessary and I will accept that I am wrong. Something about compensation is why people are avoiding family practice medicine, not the other way around.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

Another problem is that culturally, several types of patients don't want their true problem solved. They only want the quick fix.

I have a subset of patients that are upset by me when I recommend they stop smoking, lose weight, exercise, and are given homework assignments such as filling out a CBT-style checklist to see if their symptoms are improving. Mind you, I only make a serious stop smoking recommendation after the patient is reasonably stabilized (e.g. a GAF of 70 or over). Below that, I'll say I think they should stop smoking, but I want them to be on top of their more serious problems first.

Many of them just want a pill.

I've stated this before, but a major element of the healthcare problem that IMHO no one is pushing is that people need to take responsibility over their own health. Some studies suggest that the savings to the system would be in the hundreds of billions of dollars if America's obesity level were trimmed.

http://www.endocrinetoday.com/view.aspx?rid=35574

IMHO, if someone smokes, does nothing to treat his high cholesterol and high blood pressure, and has the capacity to understand that he is doing things detrimental to his health, he ought to pay more for his healthcare. I'm not suggesting people with conditions they can't help (e.g. Huntington's) be put in this category.

Which is why I've been hesitant to support any of the recent proposals to fix the system. Some people, you offer them more services, and they just use more and more with little real improvement.

What's interesting to me is that non-profit cooperatives/HMOs were given such short shrift in the recent discussion, when they can often provide these kinds of incentivized preventative and behavioral change services. For example, the cooperative which insures my family's health care mandated this year that each adult take a health survey and complete a relatively short behavior-change plan (with online feedback) to qualify for lower copays, etc for next year. For example, my wife was given a pedometer and had to log her steps for 8 weeks. In my opinion, these kinds of incentives might go a long way toward reducing health care costs--HOWEVER, people need to HAVE insurance, HAVE access to a health plan for them to catch on. That's why I supported the current reform bill as taking a really necessary step toward ensuring access.

[edit: realized after posting when I realized that this started as a "concierge practices" thread, that this is one of the reasons I get so snippy about the concierge practice idea--there are so many people needing the BASICS in life out there, and our quality of life as a nation could really be improved by attending to that. So yeah, I'm a commie-pinko socialist--but that's already been pointed out here....]

 

[Sneezing]

Primary care is re-asserting itself. They are doing so by forming cash only practices. There are organizations out there that are spear heading these endeavors. The American Academy of Private Physicians is one such organization.

Overall, healthcare is not a right, and most certainly not what our founding fathers had in mine. You can not legislate "good choices." People are still doing illicit drugs. People are still seeking out prostitutes. People are still trying to evade taxes. People are still stealing. People will ultimately continue to make poor health choices that lead to greater medical "need." All we are doing is throwing away money and throwing away medical quality at the expense of others and ultimately the fate of the whole nation.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

Primary care is re-asserting itself. They are doing so by forming cash only practices. There are organizations out there that are spear heading these endeavors. The American Academy of Private Physicians is one such organization.

Overall, healthcare is not a right, and most certainly not what our founding fathers had in mine. You can not legislate "good choices." People are still doing illicit drugs. People are still seeking out prostitutes. People are still trying to evade taxes. People are still stealing. People will ultimately continue to make poor health choices that lead to greater medical "need." All we are doing is throwing away money and throwing away medical quality at the expense of others and ultimately the fate of the whole nation.

I doubt that a handful of cash-only practices is going to reverse the tide, but we'll see.

I think that what the Founding Fathers had in mind (obvious Freudian typo notwithstanding) was to put in place a mechanism of self-governance that could adapt to changing cultural realities. The FFs barely "had in mind" the abolition of slavery or expansion of the United States west of the Appalachians. There is little to no evidence that they "had in mind" allowing women to vote, building railroads across a continent, absorbing successive waves of immigration from across the world, electricity, pharmaceuticals, atomic energy, or powered flight--but we do expect our government to take leadership and regulate these aspects of our life in order to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".

I'm in the process of reading a history of the establishment of the US Navy--amazing parallels to present day political realities. Should the whole nation have to pay taxes to support the defense of maritime commerce, which primarily brought direct benefits to a few, the merchants of Boston, Philadephia, and New York? It took tangible outside threats to make it happen, and Congressional votes were decided on razor-thin margins. Just interesting, that's all... And yeah, drunkenness, STDs, and other social ills (including slavery) were all in play back then, too. The more things change, the more they stay the same...

 

[carlosc1dbz]

Primary care is re-asserting itself. They are doing so by forming cash only practices. There are organizations out there that are spear heading these endeavors. The American Academy of Private Physicians is one such organization.

Overall, healthcare is not a right, and most certainly not what our founding fathers had in mine. You can not legislate "good choices." People are still doing illicit drugs. People are still seeking out prostitutes. People are still trying to evade taxes. People are still stealing. People will ultimately continue to make poor health choices that lead to greater medical "need." All we are doing is throwing away money and throwing away medical quality at the expense of others and ultimately the fate of the whole nation.

Well I think prostitution should be regulated if you ask me. There are many people that could use the service to deal with many issues related to depression. I think its important for every persons mental well being to be able to be satisfied sexually in life, simply because that is the way our brains were designed. That are many people with certain conditions that will never know the pleasure of a woman or a man and with everything the media is doing to push sex, it can be a very sad thing for people in a situation where they cant get a partner.

I know that people might not like what I am saying, and might argue that STDs would sky rocket, but look, I think if that industry was regulated, and involved health screen checks every month for the sex workers, it would be alright, and many people could benefit from it. Lets see what you guys think.

I know that pron is regulated and it still has a high STD level. So now I dont know.............Not that I am into porn....a friend told me.

 

[st2205]

Well I think prostitution should be regulated if you ask me. There are many people that could use the service to deal with many issues related to depression. I think its important for every persons mental well being to be able to be satisfied sexually in life, simply because that is the way our brains were designed. That are many people with certain conditions that will never know the pleasure of a woman or a man and with everything the media is doing to push sex, it can be a very sad thing for people in a situation where they cant get a partner.

I think you may be confusing prostitution for an intimate relationship. Prostitution has two sides, you know.

 

[whopper]

Wow, are we getting OT...but since it's been brought up...

I do think prostitution should be legalized. It's going to happen anyway. If so, try to make it as safe as possible, allow it to empower women, and regulate it.

And concerning sex, we may be taught that in some cases a sex surrogate is appropriate treatment, but dang it, no one ever showed me how to refer a patient to a sex surrogate! There's still a few things I haven't learned yet despite graduating from residency.

 

[st2205]

allow it to empower women

Certainly you must elaborate.

 

[carlosc1dbz]

Wow, are we getting OT...but since it's been brought up...

I do think prostitution should be legalized. It's going to happen anyway. If so, try to make it as safe as possible, allow it to empower women, and regulate it.

And concerning sex, we may be taught that in some cases a sex surrogate is appropriate treatment, but dang it, no one ever showed me how to refer a patient to a sex surrogate! There's still a few things I haven't learned yet despite graduating from residency.

I didnt just mean women giving a service, but rather by sex worker, I mean men as well as woman. I also have not had any training in regards to sending a patient with a sex worker. There are people that are 30 something and have never known a woman, or a man if its a girl. Many times these people feel unfulfilled and can lead to serious psychological disorders, like extreme depression, and weird acts with animals.

I wonder if this type of situation can lead to someone becoming a rapist or a serial killer. That would be a very sad situation.

 

[carlosc1dbz]

Certainly you must elaborate.

I was thinking about the statement regarding empowering women, and I think that legalizing intimate services (trying to think of better words) would be liberating not only for woman but also for men. I know most sex workers are women and that prostitution is illegal unless there is a camera involved, but in a sense criminalizing the service offered by ladies of the evening is actually infringing on a woman's right to do what she wants with her body. That can be very liberating when you think about it. What right should our government have to tell a woman what kind of services she can offer another person. I think many times what we need to do as a society is not try to turn religious morality into a law.

 

[st2205]

I was thinking about the statement regarding empowering women, and I think that legalizing intimate services (trying to think of better words) would be liberating not only for woman but also for men. I know most sex workers are women and that prostitution is illegal unless there is a camera involved, but in a sense criminalizing the service offered by ladies of the evening is actually infringing on a woman's right to do what she wants with her body. That can be very liberating when you think about it. What right should our government have to tell a woman what kind of services she can offer another person. I think many times what we need to do as a society is not try to turn religious morality into a law.

1. So you feel that your mother, sister, daughter, or close friend would be more empowered doing porn rather than prostitution, simply by its legal status?
2. Who said anything about religious morality?

 

[OldPsychDoc]

Speaking of your concierge services....

Anyhow, if there were ONE social change that would cut my business by two-thirds overnight, it would be the retroactive and eternal elimination of sexual abuse, of which I firmly believe prostitution is a subset ( and frankly, I'm going to climb out on a limb here and suggest that pornography is at least potentially also sexually abusive--for most "actresses" amounting to prostitution, the exchange of a sexual act for payment, as well).

I simply do not believe that someone, male or female, performing a sexual act under financial, physical, or relational coercion comes through unscathed. Admittedly, my experiences are skewed by conversations with the victims of these abuses, usually many years after the fact, but it's hardly something one does a prospective study on...

 

[st2205]

I simply do not believe that someone, male or female, performing a sexual act under financial, physical, or relational coercion comes through unscathed.

Yeah, but think of the potential benefit to all those who have been denied their human right to intercourse

 

[Sneezing]

Yeah, but think of the potential benefit to all those who have been denied their human right to intercourse

Well, if we're making medical care a right, we may as well make sex a right, too. I mean both require the highly educated skills and services of another individual. Both are therapeutic and can improve quality and quantity of life.

Huh. We're just like prostitutes. Healing arts indeed...

 

[st2205]

Well, if we're making medical care a right, we may as well make sex a right, too. I mean both require the highly educated skills and services of another individual. Both are therapeutic and can improve quality and quantity of life.

Huh. We're just like prostitutes. Healing arts indeed...

I bet it could fetch 51 votes.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

I bet it could fetch 51 votes.

At least--I'm sure they can count on any member of Congress who's been associated with a sex scandal...

 

[carlosc1dbz]

1. So you feel that your mother, sister, daughter, or close friend would be more empowered doing porn rather than prostitution, simply by its legal status?
2. Who said anything about religious morality?

Being that I am an orphan that grew up in the system, maybe we could use the orphanage director as a better example, and the lunch lady as well.

I do think that society as a whole has more respect for porn stars than they do for prostitutes. So many people want to take a picture with a porn star, and many line up for hours to do that. I cannot say the same a prostitute in down town. But then again there are so many different levels of prostitution from your crack wh*re to your very expensive escorts, but still no one want to take pictures with them.

As far as prostitutes ending up with psychological trauma, I could see how that can happen, since society has painted a picture of prostitution being disgraceful. It doesnt help either that their experience usually involves the rest of the "illegal" world such as drugs, assault and human trafficking. That why I think that maybe if it is legalized, people would practice their services in a safer environment with less exposure to the world of real crime.

As far as the religious morality being implemented as law, I just mentioned that to point out that we dont have a really good reason in my opinion to criminalize the service.

 

[rama kandra]

the revolution will be televised.

 

[st2205]

Being that I am an orphan that grew up in the system, maybe we could use the orphanage director as a better example, and the lunch lady as well.

I do think that society as a whole has more respect for porn stars than they do for prostitutes. So many people want to take a picture with a porn star, and many line up for hours to do that. I cannot say the same a prostitute in down town. But then again there are so many different levels of prostitution from your crack wh*re to your very expensive escorts, but still no one want to take pictures with them.

As far as prostitutes ending up with psychological trauma, I could see how that can happen, since society has painted a picture of prostitution being disgraceful. It doesnt help either that their experience usually involves the rest of the "illegal" world such as drugs, assault and human trafficking. That why I think that maybe if it is legalized, people would practice their services in a safer environment with less exposure to the world of real crime.

As far as the religious morality being implemented as law, I just mentioned that to point out that we dont have a really good reason in my opinion to criminalize the service.

Given the numerous random questions posted in new threads as well as some of their content, I have a difficult time not believing that you're just having fun with us.

 

[loveoforganic]

Ditto, but he's created some interesting discussions

 

[whopper]

allow it to empower women

Certainly.

Prostitution, given it's current form in the U.S., theoverwhelming majority of cases are not empowering.

Like most things, it operates on a spectrum. On the one extreme, you have children forced into sexual slavery. This is more common in 3rd world countries. However, along this spectrum, many women were made into prostitutes by drug addiction. In some cases, the women were actually premeditatevly done so by pimp/drug-dealers. The dealer gave out cocaine or heroine at very cheap rates, and when the woman became addicted, he dramatically increased the price.

On the other end of the spectrum are high class escorts who are earning in the 7 figure range. Many of these women have masters degrees if not higher and voluntarily chose the profession.

Legalizing prostitution, IMHO would push the spectrum more towards the latter end. Why? Well think about it. In countries like Amsterdam where it is legal, most men would not touch an illegal prostitute becuase they know the legal ones are regulated. It's safer for the men and the women, not just in terms of disease but also being robbed, raped or what have you. I know a few cases where men hired hookers and they themselves ended up getting raped by other men (Yeah, extreme I know, but these were people living in gang-infested areas. Real horror stories.) Most street prostitutes I've had as patients had at least one john assault them.

It would cut down on the black-market aspects of the profession, taking money away from pimps and drug dealers, it would enforce a safer working environment for the women, and it would dramatically increase their pay. Women often give the majority of their money to a pimp who only exploits them.

It happens anyway. If it's going to happen, make it happen in the manner that's safest for everyone.

 

[st2205]

It would cut down on the black-market aspects of the profession, taking money away from pimps and drug dealers, it would enforce a safer working environment for the women, and it would dramatically increase their pay. Women often give the majority of their money to a pimp who only exploits them.

This would not eradicate the spectrum. There's still that 'need' for a more wallet-friendly prostitute and who do you think will run that outside of the pimps? If anything, I think they would see this as an expansion of their client and employee base.

I think Carlos' opinion about how being a porn star carries respect and prestige because people glorify them is the kind of opinion my friends and I would have formed as 12 year olds. As a medical student, which he claims to be, it borders delusional. Unfortunately, I must state that on this issue your opinion is fast approaching his.

And with the porn industry being legal, I don't see much empowering going on. That is, of course, unless one's view of empowerment is a recognition of work, a desire for an autograph, a picture, or having many people lust after you in more 'respectful' ways, then yes I would agree that a lot of empowerment is going on. But again, this definition of empowerment is very juvenile.

 

[whopper]

Several of our opinions are debatable.

Of course it will not get rid of the spectrum, but it would change it.

As for pornography not empowering women, some of the studios today are owned and run by women. In fact some of the bigger names in the porn industry are attracted to the studios owned and run by women because they feel safer. Some of these women are making big money. That sounds like empowerment to me.

There's still that 'need' for a more wallet-friendly prostitute and who do you think will run that outside of the pimps?

Depends on what your definition of wallet-friendly is. If a man has a choice between a legalized prostitute and a street hooker, and both charge the same amount, who do you think he's choosing?

 

[Suenya]

Making something legal makes it easier to report related crimes that happen while you are engaging in it.

 

[kugel]

I do think prostitution should be legalized. It's going to happen anyway. If so, try to make it as safe as possible, allow it to empower women, and regulate it..

I get very nervous about "it's going to happen anyway" arguments in general.

Using that reasoning...
- We have never been able to eliminate bank robberies, so we should teach people how to do it with as little collateral damage (dead bodies) as possible, and how to write a proper robbery note.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UHOgkDbVqc
(I LOVE that scene!)

- Since guns will find their way into the hands of gangs no matter what we do, we should be trying to regulate the industry and practice rather than eliminate it. No one should graduate from 6th grade without a working knowledge of handgun use and passing a proficiency exam. We will provide "gun exchange" programs which allow gang members to hand in their cheap unreliable guns for ones which shoot straight, so that less people are shot with stray bullets.

When it comes to addiction, I don't have much problem with the Harm Reduction models, because the idea of addiction is that the person has lost the ABILITY to avoid the behavior. But with most everything else, I think it leads to a mixed message that only serves to condone the behavior.
As to whether prostitution is "right or wrong," I don't really have a strong opinion either way. But I think that if the society classifies something as an immoral behavior (and that debate in the US is not over), then the laws should not encourage/condone it, even implicitly. Most minors (and MANY adults) simply cannot distinguish the subtlety of "it's wrong but we've decided that we won't punish you. But please understand that it's still wrong." This is an ethical developmental stage that few people ever reach with any consistency. It is the graduate degree of personal ethical development.

But please watch the clip above!

 

[st2205]

Several of our opinions are debatable.

Of course it will not get rid of the spectrum, but it would change it.

As for pornography not empowering women, some of the studios today are owned and run by women. In fact some of the bigger names in the porn industry are attracted to the studios owned and run by women because they feel safer. Some of these women are making big money. That sounds like empowerment to me.

As you are operating under the premise that empowerment is directly related to money and ownership, I feel we're going to have to agree to disagree. There's much more to empowerment than simply the perceived power of monetary means and ownership. I would think a psychiatrist of all things would understand this distinction.

Depends on what your definition of wallet-friendly is. If a man has a choice between a legalized prostitute and a street hooker, and both charge the same amount, who do you think he's choosing?

This is very theoretical. Your premise was that high-end escort services would predominate. This is all assuming the escort services and the pimps will be offering unequal services for equal prices. That doesn't work.

This content of this thread is the most asinine thing I have read on this board in over four years.

 

[whopper]

I get very nervous about "it's going to happen anyway" arguments in general.

Don't think it's quite as simple as that.

In bank robberies, there is an entity where money is being taken away against one's will.

In prostitution, in some cases, both parties are agreeing to the exchange of money for a service. (Mind you I am only talking about prostitution that follows the above model.)

Hmm, disease, murder, etc, they will happen anyway. So I will add that prostitution, in some cases is not a situation where there is someone participating in the activity by force.

As you are operating under the premise that empowerment is directly related to money and ownership, I feel we're going to have to agree to disagree.

We may have to. But what you and I may think about it IMHO is actually irrelevant. It's up to the women who enter the business. If they want to do it, and they feel empowered, then so be it. You can hate it all you want, but how much of a right do you have to stop a woman who chooses to go to Nevada and become a legalized prostitute?

I would think a psychiatrist of all things would understand this distinction.

I understand, but like I said, it's out of our boundaries IMHO to make judgments in these areas. I don't tell my patients who are prostitutes "What you are doing is morally wrong. I don't condone your behavior. If I did, I'd be sending you a message that what you are doing is ethically acceptable."

I think it leads to a mixed message that only serves to condone the behavior.

If you don't condone legalized prostitution, fine. No problem by me. It's not like I would use a prostitute even if it were legal.

There's a lot of behaviors I don't condone that are perfectly legal. I don't feel or anyone else should be shutting down every activity I didn't agree with.

Your premise was that high-end escort services would predominate.

Uh---no. My argument is that there's 2 spectrums. The lower end of the spectrum would have it's business cut, which would reduce the spread of venereal disease, beatings of women, and a black market economy. I don't know if high-end services would predominate, but IMHO it would cut down on the street hooker phenomenon, where a woman is picked, up, and who knows what will end up happening to her, she gives most of her money to a pimp, and if she happens to have a disease there's no regulation. Remember, this is a spectrum. There's a lot of room in between.

But please watch the clip above!

Can't right now. I'm on a state-computer that filters out youtube, but I will try when I get the chance.

 

[carlosc1dbz]

As you are operating under the premise that empowerment is directly related to money and ownership, I feel we're going to have to agree to disagree. There's much more to empowerment than simply the perceived power of monetary means and ownership. I would think a psychiatrist of all things would understand this distinction.



This is very theoretical. Your premise was that high-end escort services would predominate. This is all assuming the escort services and the pimps will be offering unequal services for equal prices. That doesn't work.

This content of this thread is the most asinine thing I have read on this board in over four years.

What does empowerment mean to you st2205?

 

[Sneezing]

I happen to side with Whopper, too. I believe legalizing and regulating prostitution would be a progressive step forward. I believe it would decrease the abuse. I believe it could potentially have decreased sexual abuse to non-prostitutes. In otherwords grandpa might be less likely to abuse his grand daughter, etc.

There would still be a black market for various paraphelias and perversions, but I believe they would be markedly decreased to the point where law enforcement could actively make head way against them.

Mind you, prostitution can also be looked at in many ways. The high divorce rate and the resulting serial monogomy in our country could even be labeled as a form of prostitution with alimony. This form is less tricks and no pimps. ...just sayin'

While we are at we would also be better off if we just legalized all drugs too. There would be less crime. Less prison burden. Potentially more tax money. Less demand for ER and PCP drug seeking visits. It would solve the issue of being concerned about NPs, PAs, Psychologists, PharmDs, and every one else who wants to prescribe. Let people seek out the experts when they're ready. No need to beat our head against the wall over manipulating behavioral changes in folks who are firmly in denial.

 

[whopper]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UHOgkDbVqc

Love it. I saw that movie several years ago. Great movie, and it's held up over the years. It's just as funny now as back then!

Just for clarification, I don't think prostitution, even if legalized is something that I'd want anyone in my family entering. It's like smoking or alcohol. I think if it were legalized, there'd be more positives than negatives than keeping it completely illegal.

And if it were made legal, it'd have to be out of the face of children (e.g. restricted only to certain areas, no public billboard advertisements), it'd have to be regulated (regular check-ups from for venereal disease), etc.

Would this idea work? I'm only proposing a hypothesis. I think a study (which likely was already done) in areas where it is legal such as Amsterdam and areas in Nevada could be done to see if the pros outweigh the cons. Whatever the data suggested, I would go by that, even if the data went against my theory.