Dr. Fougner, there is something
ironic with the picture, or image.
It does feel like we have stepped through the Looking Glass and have
found a Mad Hatter organizing the socioeconomic status of sonography in
“un-medicine”.
I know many are very frustrated
with the situation, and feel that a great profession is being handed over by
default to the uncaring, uneducated greedy… and they appear to be getting away
with it because the FDA, AMA, ACR, ACOG, SDMS, AIUM, and others who should be
directing medicine are simply publishing “policies” forbiding the non-medical
use of ultrasound. All the while
these non-medical “fetal foto” studio operators go about making their pretty
baby faces for big $$, and not carring if the fetus has “three legs” because it
is a non-medical imaging session. And to add insult to injury, the
dedicated and educated RDMS certified sonographers are getting hammered 8 hours
a day, then many have to take call-back coverage at all hours of the day &
night. It is a bit crazy
making.
If something is not done, then I
think we will see many highly qualified sonographers break ranks and go
self-employed non-medical so that they can simply set their own schedules, if
nothing more… and it appears that there may be much more reward in dealing with
the pleasantries of fetal fotos versus the rigor of hospital/clinical regimes
and the difficulties thereof.
What ever happened with the
AIUM/SDMS push to get the FDA to act on their own regulations?
Peace, Terry J DuBose, RDMS
Little Rock, Arkansas
USA
On Sat, 7 Sep 2002 22:45:51 -0500
evsono@pipeline.com (art fougner, md)
writes:
> once again may i point out the irony here. the study
performed by
> medical professionals for medical indications gets
reimbursed in a
> miserly fashion by a managed cost organization and
entails maximal
> liability exposure while those performing the the
entertainment
> sonogram
> receive higher remuneration and in cash
- no hassle, no paperwork.
> are
> we nuts???
>
> art
>
> At Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Terry J DuBose wrote:
>
>
> >That's an option. Of course, it hands over the profession
to those
> who
> >have no sonographic skills or education, and
don't care anything
> about
> >quality health care. I
don't think that will stop the non-medical
> use of
>
>ultrasound, it will only exacerbate the situation.
> >
>
>Peace, Terry J DuBose, RDMS
> >
>
>------------------------------------------
> >
> >On Sat,=20
>------------------------------------------
> >
> >On 7 Sep 2002 16:13:12 -0500 <snip>) writes:
>=20
>------------------------------------------
> >
> >On >------------------------------------------
> >> My question is,=20
>------------------------------------------
> >> My questionwhy doesn't the ARDMS take disciplinary action
> >
>=20
>------------------------------------------
> >> My question>--
> >------------------------------------------
> >>=20
>--
> >------------------------------------------
> >&against
> >> registered sonographers who perform this type of =
>--
> >------------------------------------------
> >&scan
while
> >> thumbing
> >> their noses at the FDA?
>
>>
> >> >>
> >> >> --- Marilyn
Ringstaff
> >> >> <
marilyn.ringstaff@medispecialty.com>
wrote:
> >> >> > The Wall Street Journal
> >>
>> > Copyright (c) 2002, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
> >>
>> >
> >> >> > Thursday, September 5, 2002
>
>> >> >
> >> >> > New at the Mall: One-Hour
Fetus Photo
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> >
Moms Love New High-Tech Ultrasounds, but Doctors
> >> >> >
Fear Overuse
> >> >> > By Amy Dockser Marcus
>
>> >> >
> >> >> > NATALIE SHARP HAD an
ultrasound in her 20th week of
> >> >> > pregnancy, but
the
> >> >> > technician at her doctor's office wasn't able
to
> >> >> > tell her the sex of the
> >>
>> > baby. So she went to the mall and found out.
>
>> >> >
> >> >> > At the Fetal Fotos
Inc. studio in Salt Lake City,
> >> >> > the
28-year-old got
> >> >> > two ultrasound sessions for $120
and discovered she
> >> >> > was having a girl.
>
>> >> > She also walked away with portraits of the baby's
>
>> >> > face to send to her
> >> >> > family
and a keepsake video -- set to a lullaby --
> >> >> > of
the baby moving..
> >> >> > .Meanwhile, fetal-portrait
studios are booming.
> >> >> > Fetal Fotos, founded
>
>> >> > in 1994 in Salt Lake City, now operates five such
>
>> >> > stores around the
> >> >> > country,
and is opening more during coming months in
> >> >> >
Dallas; Scottsdale,
> >> >> > Ariz.; Denver; Portland,
Ore.; and Ontario, Calif.
> >> >> > Typically, they
>
>> >> > offer framed pics and videos. One studio,
Before
> >> >> > the Stork, in
> >> >>
> Bloomington, Ind., offers a trimester package (three
> >>
>> > visits for $170)
> >> >> > and a $325 "watch
my development" package (six
> >> >> > portrait sessions,
plus a
> >> >> > stuffed animal and a picture frame).
Many women
> >> >> > send videos to
> >>
>> > grandparents who live far away or screen the tapes
>
>> >> > at baby showers.. .
> >> >>
>
> >> >>
> >> >> =====
> >>
>> David J. Berck, MD, MPH
> >> >>
> >>
>>
http://finance.yahoo.com>
>> >>
> >>
>
> --
> art fougner,
md
> ich bin ein New Yorker
>
>
