4 ms·

I very much disagree with this moral view. Just because something is legal doesn't make it moral. See, when I'm being up-sold almost anywhere, in a store, eati

by flixic 14y ago

I very much disagree with this moral view. Just because something is legal doesn't make it moral. See, when I'm being up-sold almost anywhere, in a store, eating place, etc., I can make good judgement on whether it makes sense to agree to a sale. However, when it comes to medical procedures, I can't make the same good judgment, because I lack the knowledge. So I trust the doctors to make good decisions, firstly medically, but secondly financially. If I knew that they are adding many of these "reliability" checks, it would break the trust, and I would need to start making much more judgement on my own, this way probably making the matters even worse.

guylhem 14y ago
You would be shocked to know how some physicians would like to speed it up and quickly give you a diagnosis and have you out of the hospital, or just plain don't know stuff. Like you, I do believe most people can not make a good judgement, because they lack the medical knowledge, so they expect a professional to make the decision for them. Yet medical science is evolving - very quickly, with an ever reducing half-life for medical knowledge. Financial decision OTOH have a strong incentive (likewise for reliability checks) I'm sorry if it would break your trust, but for someone who has been on the both sides of the hospital business, "Doctor Doom" scenarios are far more worrisome, and unfortunately not that rare. There was a story on the NYT IIRC about a doctor his colleagues called "doctor doom and destruction" because his failings were so obvious. Yet he had a medical license and a great reputation, because of his excellent bedside skills. There are some parts of the business I'm not comfortable with (diverting MDs from patient care to billing - that's a negative externality) But this is something I now fully believe to be in the interest of both the patients and the hospital - ie something I would personally be very happy to pay for (or to have charged to me) if I was incapacitated and unable to take a decision by myself.
- sgarg26 14y ago
  Here are additional takeaways from your statement: things that sell in healthcare include 'time savings' and 'empathy extension factor' in addition to financial factors.

by flixic 14y ago

guylhem 14y ago

You would be shocked to know how some physicians would like to speed it up and quickly give you a diagnosis and have you out of the hospital, or just plain don't know stuff. Like you, I do believe most people can not make a good judgement, because they lack the medical knowledge, so they expect a professional to make the decision for them. Yet medical science is evolving - very quickly, with an ever reducing half-life for medical knowledge. Financial decision OTOH have a strong incentive (likewise for reliability checks) I'm sorry if it would break your trust, but for someone who has been on the both sides of the hospital business, "Doctor Doom" scenarios are far more worrisome, and unfortunately not that rare. There was a story on the NYT IIRC about a doctor his colleagues called "doctor doom and destruction" because his failings were so obvious. Yet he had a medical license and a great reputation, because of his excellent bedside skills. There are some parts of the business I'm not comfortable with (diverting MDs from patient care to billing - that's a negative externality) But this is something I now fully believe to be in the interest of both the patients and the hospital - ie something I would personally be very happy to pay for (or to have charged to me) if I was incapacitated and unable to take a decision by myself.

sgarg26 14y ago
Here are additional takeaways from your statement: things that sell in healthcare include 'time savings' and 'empathy extension factor' in addition to financial factors.