We're only in it for the money

[Gob]

Eighty-three percent of American physicians have considered leaving their practices over President Barack Obama’s health care reform law, according to a survey released by the Doctor Patient Medical Association.



The DPMA, a non-partisan association of doctors and patients, surveyed a random selection of 699 doctors nationwide. The survey found that the majority have thought about bailing out of their careers over the legislation, which was upheld last month by the Supreme Court.

Even if doctors do not quit their jobs over the ruling, America will face a shortage of at least 90,000 doctors by 2020. The new health care law increases demand for physicians by expanding insurance coverage. This change will exacerbate the current shortage as more Americans live past 65.

By 2025 the shortage will balloon to over 130,000, Len Marquez, the director of government relations at the American Association of Medical Colleges, told The Daily Caller.

“One of our primary concerns is that you’ve got an aging physician workforce and you have these new beneficiaries — these newly insured people — coming through the system,” he said. “There will be strains and there will be physician shortages.”

The DPMA found that many doctors do not believe the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will lead to better access to medical care for the majority of Americans, co-founder of the DPMA Kathryn Serkes told TheDC.


http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/repor ... obamacare/

[Scooter]

And what are they going to do? Go dig ditches? What bullshit.

[Jarlaxle]

In the cases of my GP, my stepfather's ENT specialist, and my wife's gynecologist: they are retiring!

[Scooter]

Somehow I doubt that 83% of the nation's doctors are within striking distance of retirement age.

And if your GP, your stepfather's ENT specialist, and your wife's OB/GYN have been earning enough that they believe they can retire comfortably rather than continue working, then I don't have a lot of sympathy for whatever grievances they purport to have with the health care legislation.

[rubato]

The DPMA is a crank group who "randomly" polled their own members; like "randomly" polling Klansmen about Dr King. They have only existed since late 2011. A Repuglican front group.

It does not represent the opinions of physicians overall.

It is true that more doctors are retiring at earlier ages now than before; for my father's generation few retired before 70 and many worked past 80 unless their health was a problem. For them medicine was more of a 'calling' and even those who made little money kept going for the personal rewards more than financial. Now a lot of Kaiser physicians are retiring exactly when they hit 60; the earliest they can get medical benefits as retirees. That precedes any effect from Romney-Care is is due to different things.


yrs,
rubato

[liberty]

You know in the future, there may be a law in this country that prevents a doctor from quitting the practice of medicine. Why not, there is already is a law that forces people to spend their money in a certain way. Face it all government is fascist to some extent, just some more than others, but what is the alternative anarchy?

[dgs49]

The headline is complete nonsense, regardless of the methodology used or the source.

There are many disturbing aspects about the way that the U.S. fills its needs for MD's. The education is excruciatingly long and expensive, and it is completely controlled by the profession itself. In years past (don't know about now), many of the med-school admission decisions on the borders were decided by who you knew. And one wonders whether it is REALLY necessary for most specialists to run this entire gauntlet, when their actual practice will be quite limited in scope. Also, how many people who could be excellent doctors simply don't pursue it because they lack the resources to complete the program?

Still, the "promise" of Obama care is that tens of millions of people will now be able to afford routine medical care and screenings, and - just like with a fitness club - nobody is talking about what will happen if they all show up at once.

One is (or should be) reminded of the fact that it is not possible for one person to have a "right" to services provided by another person. The service provider can always decline; then what is that right worth?

[Jarlaxle]

Somehow I doubt that 83% of the nation's doctors are within striking distance of retirement age.

And if your GP, your stepfather's ENT specialist, and your wife's OB/GYN have been earning enough that they believe they can retire comfortably rather than continue working, then I don't have a lot of sympathy for whatever grievances they purport to have with the health care legislation.

None of them are exactly kids..my GP is in his 60's, my stepfather's ENT specialist I have no idea (though from a description, he's 60+), Liz's OB-GYN is in her late 50's.

[rubato]

Speaking of 'only in it for the money'.


Charlie Chaplin said in his autobiography that his only motive was that he wanted to be rich.

But he may not have been telling the whole truth.


yrs,
rubato

[BoSoxGal]

The next step in healthcare reform should be greater subsidization of medical education in exchange for service in primary care fields. It is becoming common for MDs to have $300,000 in student loan debt, which incentivizes lucrative specialties, not to mention unscrupulous partnerships with big Pharma.

[rubato]

The next step in healthcare reform should be greater subsidization of medical education in exchange for service in primary care fields. It is becoming common for MDs to have $300,000 in student loan debt, which incentivizes lucrative specialties, not to mention unscrupulous partnerships with big Pharma.

Overdue, but an inevitable step towards << Socialized Medicine >> horrors!

yrs,
rubato

[kristina]

I agree, bsg.

[Big RR]

You know in the future, there may be a law in this country that prevents a doctor from quitting the practice of medicine. Why not, there is already is a law that forces people to spend their money in a certain way. Face it all government is fascist to some extent, just some more than others, but what is the alternative anarchy?

Since the early 20th century there's always been a law that forces people to spend money in a certain way--it's called the income tax (and later social security and medicare). The only difference here is that the government trying to see if the private sector can do a better job than the public one; personally I don't think they can, but I would think those who decry government spending would welcome the experiment.