I've noticed a very wide variety of approaches to pain relief among the medical professionals I've encountered during my life. Some clearly feel that acute pain, even if it is doing no functional harm, should be treated to the best of medical capability, because nobody should be expected to just cope with it. I've met others (probably more of them!) who see pain only in terms of what it can tell them about functional injury/illness, and not worth spending time/resources treating if it's the only symptom. Bone pain from cancer, long-term nerve pain from a (healed) broken back, dry socket, that sort of thing.
I know there are other considerations, such as the side effects, addictiveness and cost of strong pain relief. There are instances, though, where a good dose of a strong pain killer would enable somebody to get a good night's sleep and a bit of relief in hospital, and they are brusquely told that paracetamol is perfectly adequate, when it clearly isn't (severe pain after a knee operation, for example). I think there's also an element of medical professionals - who are more overworked, stressed and undervalued now than ever - having to be a bit ruthless in how they prioritise issues, and self-protective in how much empathy they spend on patients whose pain, although debilitating, isn't actually an immediate threat to life, or a sign of a new injury.
Curious as to what others think.