OB-GYN-L Messages for August, 2003: Re: Dr. Hale and the AMA

Re: Dr. Hale and the AMA

From: Gordon

obgyndoc@swbell.net

Fri Aug 8 18:50:02 2003

As a section Vice Chair, I have attended several ACOG District VII meetings also attended by Dr. Norman Gant. Have also had an opportunity to see Dr. Hale and Dr. Gant interact at several Annual meetings. I have also had the opportunity to observe Dr. Hale in his role as a Delegate to the AMA House of Delegates. I get the distinct impression that their opinions are personal and not intended to be institutional policy. I think, perhaps they should make some kind of 'disclaimer' when they publish this kind of thing.

With regard to the effectiveness of the AMA, I agree they have made more than their share of poor decisions. However, I do not agree with throwing stones at them and 'name calling' as the way to change it. If the AMA does not represent you and your like thinking colleagues, I suggest the cause is more ours than theirs. And, the only way to change it, is to swell the ranks of the AMA with colleagues who are willing to become activists, take the time to become effective in the county and state organizations that comprise the AMA at the national level and force change upon them. Nothing will ever be accomplished by leaving them to their own devices.

My $.02 worth,

-- Gordon M. Goldman, M.D., FACOG Private Practice, St. Louis, Missouri

> ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerald P. Rodríguez To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 9:27 AM Subject: Dr. Hale and the AMA

I sent to following letter to the editor of "ACOG Today" today. gpr

> ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerald P. Rodríguez To: mwiseman@acog.org Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 8:23 AM Subject: Dr. Hale and the AMA

I find it amusing that Dr. Ralph Hale, our Exec. VP comes on strongly pro-AMA, in a piece written for the August 2003 issue of ACOG Today, urging ACOG members to support the AMA. He bemoans the fact that 3,000 ACOG Fellows have dropped their AMA membership.

Only two years ago, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG) proudly announced through its President, Dr. Gerson Weiss, that the ABOG had dropped its association with the AMA. This schism occurred because the AMA refused to go along with a name change requested by ABOG. It wanted to change from "ABOG" to "ABOG:WH." The "WH" stands for Women's Health. There were other reasons stated including among them were such silly issues as the AMA support for physicians rights to join labor unions, and the firing of a controversial and politically active editor of JAMA.

I wrote several letters to both Drs. Weiss and Norman Gant, the Executive Director of ABOG pointing out that ABOG, while having a vital role in our specialty, dare not speak for me or any other Diplomate of the Board on political issues. ABOG (unlike the AMA) is not, I pointed out, a representative or democratic organization. In essence I said that the Board should stick to its charter function of testing and certifying those having knowledge and skills worthy of being labeled "Board Certified." Dr. Weiss never bothered to respond while Dr. Gant argued that the ABOG did indeed have every right to resign from its AMA association. This stance by ABOG certainly said to its Diplomates: "Quit the AMA."

As far as I know, the ABOG's position is still anti-AMA. I also find no sign that ACOG ever expressed any public consternation over the ABOG/AMA breach. Thus, I find Dr. Hale's sudden love affair for that stogy and irrelevant organization, called the AMA, of interest.

Gerald P. Rodríguez, M.D., FACOG Santa Fe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

use when must restrict search to only the ob-gyn-l forum...
Enter search keywords:
	Returns per screen: Require all keywords: