Dr. Daniel Craviotto stirred the pot when he sounded off on the pressures of being a physician, and the mandates imposed on doctors by the government, in a Wall Street Journal editorial this week.
His rant has actually started some vibrant conversation in the comments, on social media and in follow-up blog posts. If you haven’t been following, here’s what you’ve missed.
These two excerpts sum up the orthopedic surgeon’s argument pretty well:
“We have let nearly everyone trespass on the practice of medicine. Are we better for it? Has it improved quality? Do we have more of a voice at the table or less? Are we as physicians happier or more disgruntled than two years ago? Five years ago? Ten years ago?”
“No other profession would put up with this kind of scrutiny and coercion from outside forces. The legal profession would not. The labor unions would not. We as physicians continue to plod along and take care of our patients while those on the outside continue to intrude and interfere with the practice of medicine.”
He poses some important points about usability issues with EHRs and physician burnout. But whoa – not so fast, wrote Dr. Aaron Carroll in his retaliation in Incidental Economist.
“But do you really think that the average American doesn’t spend a whole lot of time doing things at work that they don’t enjoy? Do you really think lawyers don’t hate billing? Do you really think educators don’t hate teaching to tests and grading essays? Do you really think that small businessmen don’t hate regulations?”
Many have also been quick to point out that Craviotto is an orthopedic surgeon, the specialty with the highest average salary. But some doctors took to social media to defend his rant.
A surgeon’s call to arms http://t.co/9ZXBfsVjK7 Saying no to those who come between doctors and patients is the morally right thing to do.
— drval (@drval) May 1, 2014
Others tried to distance themselves.
Can I write an WSJ editorial now about how my life is so hard? Cry me a river. I’m a US MD. The world’s most oppressed class.
— Zackary Berger, MD (@ZackBergerMDPhD) April 30, 2014
Dan Munro followed with a piece on Forbes from the perspective of an e-patient.
“I don’t blame the healthcare industry for the status quo anymore than I would blame the engine of a car that only gets 3 miles-per-gallon. Without knowing the car, we can reasonably assume that the engine has been optimized for horsepower – not MPG. I don’t blame the engine for that – but if we need more MPG (and I think that’s without dispute), we need to radically re-engineer the engine. That’s effectively what Obamacare (and all the bureaucracy) is attempting to do. Granted it’s the very first step out of our healthcare wilderness, but it is a first step and it does extend health coverage to millions that have been without.”
@cardiobrief Although frustrated docs abound, this WSJ piece doesn’t speak for us. It makes $ seem more important than patient care.
— Chandan Devireddy MD (@drdevireddy) May 1, 2014