Re: NYTimes.com Article: Commentary: Defining a Doctor, With
From: Douglas Krell (dkrell@msn.com)
Wed Nov 10 06:08:16 2004
To Further elaborate on Rafael's point:
Excessive money is an "enabler" of dysfunctional behavior. If one has the
money to
cover all of life's bases, then it's possible to spend your time in the
hospital while ignoring the responsibilities of family and community. If
you are on a tight budget, then you really MUST get out of the hospital in
time to pick up the kids because your wife has a 5:00 business meeting.
I've always admired men (and women) who lived lives of balance that were
able to nurture their
spouses and kids and friends and had some time left over for a spiritual
life. Setting goals and keeping boundaries clear of conflicts in time and
responsibility are just part and parcel of having a "normal " life.
Although I recognize the two intern characterizations as polar opposites and
stereotypical, I find that the residents I work with today ARE in fact more
centered and a bit more like normal people. I think they still work hard
and they care about their patients and they take their responsibilities very
seriously. I don't see these folks just punching a clock, they enjoy the
work....of course most of them haven't been in court yet.
--
Douglas Krell MD FACOG
>
>Perhaps there is another viewpoint:
>
>In the past when income was not an issue (more than enough always) one
>indeed practiced medicine for the joy of that practice, the money was
>secondary, and one did not need to worry about it.
>
>Today, when the reimbursements are so marginal, our focus is gradually
>forced to the tedium of making ends meet, and after a while the joy of
>practice is just sucked away.
>
>The new/potential physicians see that, and put their lifestyle up front.
>It is a process of selection, the society will get the kind of medicine
>that it is willing to pay for. There is no free lunch. I have been
>predicting for last 5 years that we are heading towards a situation where
>we will have two types of physicians -
>.. those who are independently rich (as it was 100-200 years ago) who are
>practicing for the pure pleasure of it, and
>.. those who are simply employees, punching the clock and no more.
>
>Sad but true
>
>Rafael C. Haciski MD FACOG
>Bradenton FL
>
>On Nov 9, 2004, at 14:31, D. Ashley Hill wrote:
>
>>As evidenced by the listmembers who have focused on the gender
>>difference, the author should have made the genders neutral, which would
>>have been a more effective way of focusing on the interplay between the
>>"old school" and "modern" students. Hopefully she does not have a
>>secondary agenda. I noticed many years ago that many of my (male and
>>female) students lack the enthusiasm expected of us during our training.
>>I speak at several premed events each year, and over the past 5 years
>>the most common question is "which specialty has the best lifestyle?"
>>Then the questions really begin: "what about pathology?" "is derm easy?"
>>"can I be a part-time trauma surgeon?" "which one makes the most with
>>the fewest hours?"
>>
>>Medicine is changing. However, I never spent 24/7 in the hospital for
>>months on end like "house officers" of years past. I suspect the
>>quality of student we see is a direct reflection on the entitlement our
>>citizens feel with regards to lifestyle and income.
>>
>>Ashley
>>
>>At Mon, 08 Nov 2004, Harrison Sheld wrote:
>>>
>>>I read this article the same day the November Green Journal arrived.
>>>There is an article on p.1089 by Larry Kincheloe, M.D. entitled, "Gender
>>>Bias Against Male Obstetrician-Gynecologists in Women's Magazines." The
>>>NYTimes article cited is the quintessential example of such bias.
>>
>>--
>>D. Ashley Hill, MD
>>Associate Director
>>Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
>>Florida Hospital Family Practice Residency
>> and Loch Haven Ob/Gyn Group
>>Orlando, Florida
>>
