Comments on: What this man needed was a doctor!

By: m

Thu, 15 Jul 2004 22:52:37 +0000

the above comment is a good argument for health savings accounts. far better for the consumer to spend money as they wish on health care. for the young or healthy folks..why pay hundreds of dollars/month for health care insurance that thery likely don’t feel they need. this mandatory payout creates the multimilliion dollars salaries CEO administrators of the plans)
once people age or find themselves needy of health care then they can use the tax free money in the health savings acount as they see fit. many doctors (at least in primary care) could charge drastically less fees if they went on a cash basis. in this situation both the patient and provider win.

By: hope

hope — Sat, 10 Jul 2004 19:38:07 +0000

You say “Patients will be willing to pay a reasonable amount to get personalized health care.”

Only those patients who can afford it. You can rant all day about insurance companies and how awful they are, but in the end, it all comes down to what people are able and willing to pay.

Many Americans can barely afford the insurance they’ve currently got, and many can’t afford it it all. Sorry, but the notion that a personalized relationship with one’s doctor is something most people prioritize is just inaccurate. We might say we do, but priorities are reflected in where we are willing to put our resources. I don’t know of many families that would place a more personalized relationship with their doctor over meeting the mortgage, saving for college, putting food on the table or even taking an occasional family vacation.

By: m

Fri, 09 Jul 2004 01:33:42 +0000

amen to above.

it’s easy to forget that the “system” of managed care is funding a for profit GIANT that greases many wheels belonging to CEOs, midldle management administrators, television ad executives, billing experts, legal armies, paper pushers, cutomer service reps. etc… . The patient is a necessary patsy, the physician is no more than a “provider”.

time to walk the path of integrity , time to acknowledge the profession is not dependent on third party payors. Our professional survival is only dependent on the people who we try to help.

By: Bernie Simon

Bernie Simon — Fri, 09 Jul 2004 00:39:08 +0000

We need to return to first principles. The reason we became physicians was to care for people, not patients! By that I mean, caring for the patient, rather than the disease.

Though I agree with your point, I think we also need a system of medicine that knows that sees the patient as a whole. After all, it’s the patient who is sick and not his blood chemistry. The blood chemistry is merely a symptom and treating the blood chemistry instead of the patient is a category mistake. The idea that the disease is one thing and the patient another is a pernicious idea that leads to the sort of dehumanization you criticize.

By: m

Thu, 08 Jul 2004 23:46:10 +0000

too many people have entrenched interests (other than patient care) and will not admit that the reimbursement system is rotten
in concept, spirit and practice.

solution: Practice simply, ethically, with our independence….time to walk away from the managed care system.

By: RGL

RGL — Thu, 08 Jul 2004 21:21:51 +0000

A dialysis center catering to a large number of patients has the atmosphere of a factory. Patients are shuttled in and out, with a boob tube to watch or magazines to read. What is missing is the human touch, the caring and warmth we need to give to patients. The business concerns have overtaken our instincts to care and comfort sick human beings.

Unless it’s a multispecialty practice, internists who can
coordinate care and spend time with patients are generally absent from the scene, as in this case. Neprhologists, while good at what they do, cannot function in that integrative role like internists.

I’m amazed the widow of this patient still had the wits around her, with her experiences, to tell America what the failings are of our health system. Her story is disturbing and should serve as a wake-up call on what our primary functions are as doctors.

The late Dr. George Peabody said it best: THE SECRET IN TAKING CARE OF THE PATIENT IS IN CARING FOR THE PATIENT.

By: CHenry

CHenry — Thu, 08 Jul 2004 16:03:00 +0000

We need a climate where doctors can insist on a direct doctor-patient relationship, in use of time and in compensation for work done. That does not always mean that the relationship will cost more, but it may mean that patients will have to be persuaded,and hopefully not forced, to accept first responsibility for paying their doctor, and then take on responsibility for dealing with whatever insurer they are contracting with afterward.

The productivity model is borne of the costly administrative burden, and the predatory opportunism that has marked the hird-party payment system we have come to accept. Insurers are not directly accountable to their customers, and the costs of their non-performance are multiplied when doctors have to build an administrative enterprise that has to deal with those insurers.