Skip to main content

Do I Need a New Doctor?

I am a parsimonious practitioner.  While I can’t cite statistics, I strongly suspect that I order fewer laboratory studies, prescribe fewer drugs and order fewer diagnostic tests than do my peers.  Medical minimalism has always been my medical world view.  This can feel a bit lonely at times in a profession that is rife with over-diagnosis and over-treatment.  I am not suggesting that my approach is the only reasonable medical approach, only that it’s the style that I’m most comfortable with. 

All of us should consider the philosophy of the professionals we engage.  And the professionals need to gauge the goals and risk tolerance of those they serve.  These relationships may need to enter into negotiations from time to time in order to agree on which pathway to pursue.

Physicians, judges, law enforcement professionals, teachers and others are not homogenous philosophically.  While folks may (hopefully) agree on the facts, the interpretations may differ.

Consider two different financial planners.  One advocates for a more aggressive portfolio arguing that this has the promise of a greater financial return.  This approach might allow the client to retire earlier or to retire with greater security.  A different advisor has a different approach, perhaps because he sees the world differently or has been molded by certain experiences.  He counsels for a more conservative approach arguing that earning less over time is worth the added security that the investment will remain secure.

Who has the better argument here?  Folks will disagree here and their response will depend upon their own philosophies.  For example, a very cautious investor will likely be partial to the second advisor I cited above.



Balancing One Philosophy Against Another

It’s the same with medical care.  Physicians over time tend to retain patients who share their doctors’ philosophy.  Let's face it, there are many patients who are not satisfied unless the office visit ends with a prescription or a test.  This action validates their reason for the office visit. They likely regard no action as medically inadequate.  Such a patient may not find my restrained medical approach to be compatible with their needs and likely will find doctors who are more comfortable using the medical gas pedal than the brake.  Some of us feel that less is more while others feel that more is more.

Of course, doctors and others need to be somewhat flexible in order to meet the needs of those we serve. And we are.  But being flexible doesn’t mean abandoning one's core principles.  There are limits to how far any of us can or should bend.  If, for example, you are a reluctant investor who is worried about the health and safety of your retirement money, and your advisor wants you to invest it all in cryptocurrency, then perhaps, you need a different advisor.  Similarly, the same principle may apply to your doctor. 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Stop Medical Malpractice: The White Coat Wall of Silence

Photo Credit Leisure Guy, one of my most faithful commenters, opines that I am omitting an important aspect of the tort reform argument. He has implored me repeatedly to read a particular book that I suspect buttresses his views, but this worthy pursuit is simply not near the top of my priority pyramid. Since he’s retired, he enjoys the luxury of burrowing deeply into the base of his priority pyramid. With 4 tuitions to go, retirement is a distant mirage for me. I’m can be a ‘leisure guy’, but only in my dreams. I have written throughout this blog and elsewhere that there are too many frivolous lawsuits against physicians. I have admitted that caps on non-economic damages are not ideal, because they deny some worthy plaintiffs of complete compensation, but I support them because I believe they serve the greater good. I have ranted that there is no effective filter to screen out physicians who should never be invited to the litigation party in the first place. I believe that the...

When Should Doctors Retire?

I am asked with some regularity whether I am aiming to retire in the near term.  Years ago, I never received such inquiries.  Why now?   Might it be because my coiffure and goatee – although finely-manicured – has long entered the gray area?  Could it be because many other even younger physicians have given up their stethoscopes for lives of leisure? (Hopefully, my inquiring patients are not suspecting me of professional performance lapses!) Interestingly, a nurse in my office recently approached me and asked me sotto voce that she heard I was retiring.    “Interesting,” I remarked.   Since I was unaware of this retirement news, I asked her when would be my last day at work.   I have no idea where this erroneous rumor originated from.   I requested that my nurse-friend contact her flawed intel source and set him or her straight.   Retirement might seem tempting to me as I have so many other interests.   Indeed, reading and ...

Prostate Cancer Screening: Stop The PSA Train!

About 10 years ago, my dad was to see his general internist. I have always refrained from giving medical advice to my family, for all of the reasons why doctors should not treat or advise their relatives. But, on this occasion, I did give Dad some unsolicited advice, particularly as I knew that his physician fired the diagnostic testing trigger readily. “Dad, please make sure that he doesn’t check the PSA (prostate specific antigen) test.” Dad indicated that he would convey my concern to his doctor, who ran the test on him anyway. Apparently, he includes the PSA test as a matter of routine on all men over a certain age. Twenty-five years ago as a curious, but skeptical medical student, I learned about prostate cancer. I learned that every man will develop it if he lives long enough. I learned that most cases of prostate cancer remain silent and never interfere with the individual’s life. I learned that the treatment for these cancers involves either major surgery or radiation, both of ...