Skip to main content

Colonoscopies and Roller Coasters - Common Ground

A recent article in Cleveland’s primary daily newspaper – which is still printed - discussed an intriguing issue.  An Ohio state representative has offered a bill that would require amusement parks to publicize online if any of their attractions are not running.  The bill is offered as a consumer protection measure to inform patrons of the status of park attractions before they travel distances and face pricey admission costs.  Folks will not be amused to arrive at an amusement park to discover that the ride that brought them there is out of order.  Do you think that a family who is notified at the ticket booth that the roller coaster of their dreams isn’t rolling will simply head back to the car head for home?  Imagine those happy kids in the back seat! “Hey kids, now we have time to go to the library and borrow some educational books!”

We’ll see if this proposed bill becomes law.  Amusement park owners may push back on what they feel is government encroachment, but I think a smarter play would be to enthusiastically welcome this new service to their customers.  Good will = more profits. Indeed, opposing such a measure risks, if not guarantees, alienating their customer base.


Out of Order?


There are other arenas where applying this same customer policy might be considered.

Should theater goers be advised in advance if any of the principal actors will be replaced by understudies?  

If a restaurant that is well known for its signature steak dish won’t have it available for their weekend customers because of a supply chain snafu, are salivating customers entitled to know this? 

If a furniture or appliance store offers an amazing deal in a newspaper ad, is it fair to the public if the stores had only 1 or 2 of these items available that were sold just after the stores opened?

Would you want to take your family on a day trip to a well known Museum of Natural History to discover that T-rex has been sidelined for maintenance?

You get the idea.

And because I write medical commentary, surely there’s a medical angle to all of this.  We confront this same issue on occasion in our endoscopy suite.  I do endoscopic procedures on two groups of patients:  those whom I have never met and those whom are my own patients.  Here’s an observation that is self-evident.  Patients prefer that their own gastroenterologists perform their procedures. They don't want a  stranger at the scope. This is not a ‘ride share’ experience when folks request a ride to be greeted by an unknown driver.  However, on occasion, an endoscopist will be suddenly unavailable to work and a covering gastroenterologist will step in to serve these patients, many of whim have completed the beloved laxative prep.

Are these patients entitled to know that a new doctor will be available to serve them?  Absolutely, and we make every effort to reach them so that patients have an option to reschedule.  Almost none of them do, but I believe that they have a right to know 

There are instances, however, when we simply cannot reach the patient who first learns of the physician change after they have arrived to the office.  Sometimes, patients shrug this off, but not always.  At times, we have had do engage in some damage control.

I don’t think that businesses face any obligation to inform customers of all manners of inventory shortages.  Do we expect office supply stores to blast out statements announcing that they are running short on yellow Sharpie pens?  Probably not.

But if a business or organization or even a doctor’s office won’t have available main events or players that draw folks there, then I think there should be disclosure.  If your gastroenterologist has been switched out with a stranger for your colonoscopy, then you have a right to know in advance that a new physician is on the scene.

Editor’s Note: For 16 years, I've published weekly essays here on Blogspot, which will continue. I’ve now begun publishing my work on a new blogging platform, Substack, and I hope you’ll join me there. Please enter your email address at this link to receive my posts directly to your inbox.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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 ...

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...

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 ...