MD Whistleblower

There are some patients we doctors never forget. They linger in our memories for various reasons. Often, it is their serious or unusual medical condition that stays with us. On other occasions, it is a zany or unique personality that we recall, even years later. Rarely, when the doctor-patient relationship becomes injured, then the patient may become unforgettable. I remember a particular patient from 20 years ago for a very different reason. I recall him clearly because he rejected my medical advice to him with aplomb. Although I haven’t seen him for two decades, I will never forget him. He taught me a lesson, which is not surprising since patients are our best teachers. There are no CME credits for these lessons, but I’ve learned more from them than I have at many medical conferences or from medical journals. It was July 1991, a month after I completed my fellowship in gastroenterology. I had jointed a multispecialty group, and I was the only gastroenterologist in this particular

Okay, readers, how many of you desire to have a feeding tube inserted into your belly one day? Some of you? A few of you? All of you? Not me, that’s for sure. So, if there comes a time when I cannot speak for myself, let this blog post serve as a statement of my philosophy that I do not wish to be subjected to everything that medicine may have to offer. If I am enjoying no meaningful life, and if I am not giving pleasure to others… I placed yet another feeding tube (PEG) in a patient this week. This is often an unsatisfying experience for me as I am not always serving the patient’s interest. Usually, the patient is not capable to express his own views and the decision is properly delegated to the family or to a designated medical power of attorney (POA). In this instance the tube was medically indicated and I reviewed the procedure and the alternatives with the 3 daughters in a conference room. The daughters were uncertain how to proceed. The ladies were clearly vexed. One of them w

Did Washington Chop Down the Cherry Tree? Courtesy of National Archives …resolve to be honest at all events; and if in your own judgment you cannot be an honest lawyer, resolve to be honest without being a lawyer. No need to identify the authorship of the above quotation, which should be known by all discerning readers, such as those who feast on the weekly Whistleblower offering. For those who have suffered a cognitive lapse, I will provide 4 identity clues. Take a guess after each clue. If after the 4th clue, you are still clueless, then politely request a 5th and 6th clue in the comments section, and they will be provided to you. (1) He had a high pitched voice. (2) He was prone to depression and melancholy. (3) He was an ambitious and successful attorney. (4) He was known as ‘the rail-splitter’. Honesty in medicine is a fundamental pillar of our profession. However, physicians and scientific investigators have the same moral failings as the rest of our species. While

I regard myself as a spirited patient advocate. (What doctor doesn’t?) When facing a patient, I try to focus entirely on the patient’s interest. My advice is hopefully not tainted by the patient’s insurance status or external influences. A patient without medical insurance should receive the same medical advice as a corporate CEO, although the former may reject the medical advice for financial reasons. As Whistleblower readers know, I am a conservative practitioner of the art and science of gastroenterology. I first developed this medical world view as an intern and resident, and remained a parsimonious practitioner even after completing a gastroenterology fellowship at an institution where patients were routinely subjected to a tsunami of testing. I don’t pull the colonoscopy trigger easily or order many imaging studies. I prefer to prescribe a tincture of time instead of a test. Most patients appreciate this measured approach, although some prefer the tsunami. I don’t practice

Photo Credit I barely escaped from an embarrassing situation recently in the hospital. I was consulted to place a feeding tube, called a PEG, in an ICU patient. We gastroenterologists are rarely consulted for our opinion on whether these tubes make sense, which they often don’t. We are recruited to these patients simply to perform the technical function of inserting the tubes, so that Granny, or Great-Granny, or Great-Great… , won’t starve. Multiple medical studies have demonstrated that providing this nutrition to individuals with advanced dementia doesn’t benefit them. In addition, while it may seem intuitive that artificial feeding provides comfort, this may not be the case. It may provide more comfort to the physicians and family than it does to the patient. The above paragraph is not a rigid presentation. Obviously, the decision to place and accept a feeding tube must be individualized. Regardless, it is inarguable that too many of these tubes are being placed for the wrong re

I have previously posted on the ethics of paying for organ donation. I find this notion to be ethically troubling, but I believe the issue deserves fair debate. In general, my belief is that a personal anecdote should not drive policy in medical ethics. There are many individual vignettes that are poignant and heartbreaking that tempt us to relax our ethical boundaries. For example, permitting us to harvest organs from folks who are ‘not quite dead’, would save lives, but society’s rights outweigh this benefit, in my view. For similar reasons, I resist efforts to relax the definition of death in order to increase the reservoir of available organs. If death is redefined as a result of a search for truth, then the process is ethically permissible. Participants in these discussions would include medical professionals, theologians, ethicists, legal experts and ordinary people. If a result of this process would be that there would be more organs available for transplantation, then I would

Medical ethics has properly gained a foothold in the public square. There is a national conversation about euthanasia, stem cell research, fertilization and embryo implantation techniques, end-of-life care, prenatal diagnosis of serious diseases, defining death to facilitate organ donation, cloning and financial conflicts of interest. Nearly every day, we read (or click) on a headline highlighting one of these or similar ethical controversies. These great issues hover over us. We physicians face ethical dilemmas every day in the mundane world of our medical practices. They won’t appear in your newspapers or pop up on your smart phones, but they are real and they are important. Here is a sampling from the everyday ethical smorgasbord that your doctor faces. How would you act under the following scenarios? A physician has one appointment slot remaining on his schedule. Two patients have called requesting this same day appointment. The first patient who called has no insurance and owe

The medical profession’s ability to diagnose far exceeds its ability to effectively treat the conditions discovered. Consider arthritis, Parkinson’s disease, irritable bowel syndrome, strokes, emphysema and many cancers. When a physician orders a diagnostic test, ideally it should be to answer a specific question, rather than a buckshot approach. A chest x-ray is not ordered because a patient has a cough. It should be done because the test has a reasonable chance of yielding information that would change the physician’s advice. If the doctor was going to prescribe an antibiotic anyway, then why order the chest x-ray? Physicians and patients should ask before a test is performed if the information is likely to change the medical management. In other words, is a test being ordered because physicians want to know or because we really need to know the results? Does every patient with a heart murmur, for example, need an echocardiogram, even though this test would be easy to justify to

I have always felt that issues should be judged by the context of their times. For some issues, however, context provides no justification. Thankfully, the field of medical ethics has evolved into a robust discipline, and there is an enormous need for it. I have read defenses of prior ethical lapses, and even some recent ones, suggesting that context matters. If a 3 month placebo-controlled study is conducted in the developing world testing a medicine that was highly effective against a serious illness, are the ethical dimensions considered and respected? Were the pharm companies choosing this study locale as a cheap test run for their drug, which will ultimately be marketed in the west? Is it ethically problematic not to provide additional medications to ill subjects after the 3 month trial ends? Can we be assured that a rigorous informed consent process was followed? Sadly, outrageous practices have been reported in the very recent past. Our president and secretary of state recen

Recently, I wrote a post on plagiarism in medicine. I advocate a stringent code of ethics for our profession. Once our integrity becomes squishy, then the whole tapestry starts to unravel. We physicians are charged to search for and guard the truth. In 1910, Sir William Osler wrote: No human being is constituted to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; and even the best of men must be content with fragments, with partial glimpses, never the full fruition. Of course, we physicians don’t always succeed in enlightening the truth, but we try. Every day, every one of us faces choices that test us. Some are easy. Most of us would not falsify billing submissions. Other choices are murkier. For example, do we coax a symptom out of a patient so that the procedure or visit becomes a covered benefit? Have we informed a patient whom we are recommending a colonoscopy about the radiologic alternatives? When a patient informs us that his primary care physician has referred hi

We have a classroom in our home. It’s called the dinner table. This is the locale where over the years, my wife and I have tried to teach 5 kids right from wrong. As we parents ourselves still struggle with these issues, it is clear that integrity remains an indefinite element of life’s curriculum. There was a time when this table was an actual classroom, when my wife and I home schooled 2 of our youngsters for about 3 years. I could devote an entire blog to this adventure. Many of our family dinners were seasoned with discussions about integrity. We have discussed and debated the lapse in integrity that has seeped into our educational culture, as well as into society at large. We have reviewed dozens of news accounts detailing ever more resourceful methods of cheating and stealing ideas without attribution. This phenomenon has no boundary and has permeated the medical profession. Euphemisms like ghostwriting cannot camouflage the practice for what it often is – cheating. Yes, I

Gastroenterologist's view of the stomach Recently, while covering for one of my partners on a weekend, I was consulted by a physician to do a procedure. The doctor wanted his patient to undergo an EGD, which is a scope test that examines the esophagus, stomach and first portion of the small intestine called the duodenum. We gastroenterologists do this test routinely to search for an explanation for a patient’s symptoms, or to determine if these organs might be harboring a lesion that is silently bleeding. Gastroenterologists are obligated to perform procedures for sound medical reasons. I have already confessed publicly on this blog why physicians like me have performed medical tests for the wrong reasons. The medical universe is not ideal, and neither are its players. Nevertheless, we want our care to make sense and not to waste dollars. For example, if a patient is suffering an acute headache, it would be hard to justify ordering a CAT scan of the abdomen, which would be unl

Hypocrisy : The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness. Which of the following medical tests or procedures do physicians commonly recommend, but state they would never accept themselves? (1) Cardiac catheterization (2) Screening colonoscopy (3) Feeding tube placement (4) PSA screening for prostate cancer (5) Hip replacement surgery Answer appears at the post’s end. Last week, I was asked by a primary care physician to place a feeding tube in an NNHP, a nonagenarian nursing home patient. The patient had a panoply of active medical issues, and was at the end of life. The feeding tube was advised because the patient’s swallowing function was impaired and he was, therefore, at risk for pneumonia if he ate. These swallowing evaluations are generally performed by speech pathologists, whom I have found to be dedicated and competent professionals. As an aside, they often uncover swallowing defects that suggest that eating

Could this man increase organ donation? Photo Credit Choose the best answer. To stimulate organ donation, we should provide organ donors with: Cold, hard cash Upgrades to business class on any flight within the continental United States for 1 year College tuition discounts for up to 3 children Income tax relief First row Bruce Springsteen concert tickets A certificate of appreciation There is a reason that we don’t ask families of kidnapped victims what our policy should be with regard to hostage negotiations. Any family in this situation, including mine, would favor paying the ransom. While this would serve an individual family’s interest, it would conflict with the public’s interest as it would encourage more kidnappings. Thus, the greater good would be compromised. Similarly, families seeking an organ for a loved one are not the proper source of policy recommendations for organ procurement. Understandably, they want an organ at any cost. Certainly, if my child ne

The U.S. Supreme Court has opined that we cannot falsely scream Fire! in a crowded theater, despite our sacrosanct right of free speech. Even sacred rights have limits. When individual rights collide with societal rights, then each side’s arguments must be weighed to determine whose rights will prevail. This is not a clean or satisfying process as each claimant brings passion and legitimate arguments to the table. I have been involved in a cyber colloquy with Maggie Mahar at Health Beat discussing if health care is a right. Maggie is well known in health care circles and examines health care policy from a liberal perspective. She’s on the left and I’m not. I hesitate to define health care is an absolute right before considering some of the broader ethical ramifications. Is health care a human right? Is health care a constitutional right? Is health care a privilege? Is health care a commodity to be purchased at the discretion of the consumer? Is health care a responsibility? A laudabl

This past week, the Montana Supreme Court heard a right-to-die case where the plaintiff argued that there is a constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide. A Montana physician had refused this request from a terminal cancer patient, who died in December 2008 without medical assistance. No state in the union currently has a constitutional right to die, although physician-assisted suicide is a legal practice in Oregon and Washington. In 1997 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there is no fundamental constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide, although it did not prohibit the practice entirely. Once the balance of the U.S. Supreme Court shifts leftward in the coming years, perhaps a constitutional right to medical euthanasia will be ‘discovered’ in the U.S. Constitution. If the Montana plaintiff’s view prevails, would physicians there be breaking the law by refusing to assist a patient who requested a doctor-assisted death? Would such principled doctors be denying a patient

Organ donation is a white hot medical ethics issue. In the last month alone, there have been two scandalous reports alleging criminal and immoral donation practices. First, we read about a man, a rabbi no less, arrested for trafficking in kidneys. He referred to himself as a ‘ matchmaker ’, not quite the Fiddler on the Roof image of the wizened Yenta character who arranged marriages. The second story exploded after an article appeared in a Swedish newspaper that accused the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) of harvesting organs from wounded or killed Palestinians. Unlike the arrested rabbi, the Israeli Prime Minister vociferously denied the scurrilous charges. I suspect that the rabbi is guilty, by his own statements, but I do not believe the diabolical allegations against the Israelis. Charges of this nature should never be publicized in the absence of sufficient evidence. The reason that organ trafficking exists is because there is a shortage of available organs. We need a legal and ethica

We have spent many dinner discussions with our kids discussing plagiarism. This infraction was verboten even when I was student back when, according to our kids, ‘I used to take the dinosaur out for a walk’. While I don’t think the offense is more serious today, it is much more prevalent. Educators report that there is an epidemic of it in our schools and universities. Perhaps, the practice even crosses national boundaries, which might mean that we are in the midst of a plagiarism pandemic. Unlike ‘swine flu’, there’s no vaccine available for this disease. Of course, the offense is so much easier to commit today, with expansive information on any imaginable subject available with a keystroke. I’m sure I could cut & paste a 10 page term paper on nearly any topic during half-time of a televised football game. Some of these rule-bending kids grow up to be adults who still misunderstand the importance of owning work that appears under their name. Joe Biden, historians Doris Kearns Good

Consider this hypothetical vignette. Tiger Woods accepts my challenge to play 18 holes. Obviously, the gallery would be packed with golf enthusiasts who would cancel job interviews, vacations and even worship services in order to witness this historic competition. Spectators would be permitted to place bets at even money. Perhaps, my mother would bet on me, but no other sane person would. They would properly conclude that even my best performance against Tiger’s worst would be inadequate. There is nothing I could do to change the outcome. All of my efforts would be futile. Futility cannot be proved with mathematical certainly. After all, Tiger could develop acute appendicitis on the fairway and have to forfeit. He could be arrested. Lightning could strike. Killer bees could take him down. Nevertheless, the overwhelming odds are that I would be vanquished and humiliated. Medical futility is a more serious issue that exists in every physician’s office and hospital in the country. Example

Medical politics has dominated the news for months. Each day, we read about the machinations of various congressional committees and our legislators who are dueling over health care reform. We learn about deals that the president has forged with various medical industry stakeholders. We watch as many liberal Democrats angle to put the ‘Blue Dogs’ in a secure kennel. We read about town hall meetings across the country being disrupted by folks who are accused of being right wing tools. Too much politics and too little policy. There is another genre of medical politics that is not covered by the press, but should be of interest to every one of us who seeks health care. This is the politics that exists in every doctor’s office and directly affects your medical care. I was never taught about any of this during my medical training. I learned about it on the job, and much of it isn’t pretty. As a younger doctor, I assumed that physicians chose consultants for their patients based on their med