Each individual has an underlying and ethical right to make the lifestyle choices they want when it comes to cosmetic surgery, providing they are suitable for it. Whether it is to improve their flawless appearance to maintain their youthful looks or boost their self-esteem and confidence on a social perspective, but also for improved inner wellbeing.
However, not everyone can afford Botox or other cosmetic alterations, which is why these individuals need to be protected from the recent rise in number of adverts in women’s and men’s magazines, offering free cosmetic treatments such as Botox, when you pay for at least one treatment.
Termed as “aggressive marketing”, this technique is perceived as preying in on women’s insecurities at a time in their life when they are not satisfied with their image and unable to afford such luxuries. Body image counsellors up and down the country condemn such marketing methods, which offer cheap treatments without a safe guarantee.
It’s Cheap, But Is It Safe?
The safest advice is to save up and pay for safer, but more expensive treatment which will give you results that you can rely on. After all, an investment in your image cannot afford to take any shortcuts where treatment is being offered at a surprisingly low rate.
If a cosmetic practitioner in this country, cannot provide any insurance or guarantee of being able to correct any errors, then it is worth finding a practitioner who, although may charge more, but give 100% assurance and peace of mind.
Protecting Individuals from Cheap Treatments
A recent new development in the media, reports new guidelines being introduced to act as safety net, to protect individuals from any risks associated with cosmetic treatments. The new guidelines, expected to be in force by April this year, restrict medical professionals from offering mouthwatering discounts in the form of gift vouchers, competition prizes, loyalty cards, friend referrals and buy one get one free incentives. Doctors failing to adhere to the new guideline procedures, can face prosecution or lose their rights to practice medicine in the future.
Personalised assessments should be offered as an alternative to attracting large numbers of patients through ‘price-driven decisions’, resulting in more eligible and satisfied patients, without complications.
If they’re not right for the treatment, the professional should say no.
The new guidelines are essential to protect individuals being targeted like prey. Adverts play a large role in influencing our thought processes, especially in individuals commuting to and from work on public transport. The psychological impact of alluring, whole-page, published adverts offering great deals, makes it justifiable and equally tempting for individuals with an in-built trust placed in many leading-brand newspapers and magazines available on trains and newsagents shelves.
The natural assumption will be, “If its passed authorisation to be printed, then it must be ok?” This is the unconscious question many will undeniably ask themselves during the decision making process of whether to make that call to book an appointment.
Such advertising really does trivialise the risks involved in administering treatment to the patient who is filtered through the safety net.