Re: Dr. Hale and the AMA
From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)
Sat Aug 9 07:30:17 2003
It seems that Donald Palmisano is a better advocate for physicians than
Gerson Weiss or Charles Hammond, sad to say.
when i was certified, the Board was looking to certify specialists who
could bail out a GP in the middle of the night. Now, we seem to have
been caught up in issues more concerned with political correctness than
medicine.
just my opinion - i could be wrong.
art
At Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Gordon wrote:
>
>Gerald,
>
>You are of course, correct. I don't feel you and I have any disagreement. That was the intent of my concern that they should couch those remarks as 'personal', not institutional politics. On the other hand, the silence of ACOG on the ABOG position (ie., failure to support) speaks volumes. There are times when not responding to an action and allowing someone to 'hang out to dry', is more effective than any response.
>
>There is much difference of opinion within the national administration of ACOG, also. Did you read (or hear) Dr. Hammond's inaugural address in the Green Journal? He denigrated the AMA also, and proposed formation of a coalition of specialty societies to replace it. I wrote a lengthy letter to the Editor (never published) with a different perspective, but all I got was a letter from Chuck, essentially saying I was certainly entitled to my opinions. Will send you a copy of that privately, if you wish.
>
>Best regards,
>
>--
>Gordon
>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gerald P. Rodríguez
> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
> Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 10:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Dr. Hale and the AMA
>
> Gordon,
>
> I think I might have unwittingly mislead you to think that I was slamming the AMA. I wasn't. I'm a card carrying member and generally, although certainly not always, agree with its decisions and positions. The main point I am trying to make is that here we have two important and in many ways related voices for American ob-gyns and collectively they are speaking out of both sides of their mouths. Gant and the ABOG seems to hold the AMA as irrelevant and passé, while Hale seems to strongly support it. I think that the ABOG position on the AMA is totally untenable while Hale's position is one I would probably agree with. I was just trying to point out the dichotomy and division and, in my own naive way am asking: "Why can't we just get along and stand united?" BTW, Gordon, has ACOG ever disavowed the ABOG position on the AMA? Where was the voice of ACOG two years ago when ABOG made this high-handed move? Methinks it may be the politics of self-interest taking precedence over reason and the common good.
>
> Gerald P. Rodríguez, M.D., FACOG
> Santa Fe
>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gordon
> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
> Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 5:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Dr. Hale and the AMA
>
> Gerald,
>
> 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
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
--
art fougner, md
ich bin ein New Yorker
