Some professional associations mimic unions in structure and influence. The consequences could be beneficial in some ways but are very destructive in others. When they become, in a sense, a monopoly, they are dangerous.
In the human health field, there are many different, accepted approaches to dealing with the achieving, maintaining and restoring of health. Problems arise when the official policies of government agencies favors one over the other, often to the detriment of the others and, in the opinion of the others, patient care.
The inter-professional concerns are serious but are dwarfed by those of the intra-professional differences. For example, a national medical association which controls health issue policy for the government sets the rules for what is "standard practice". Any practitioner who varies from those because of personal preferences which are outside the formula, risks his license, law suits and a loss of privileges which endangers his ability to remain in practice. In some ways, this parallels the power of labor unions to force compliance among its members regardless of whether or not the member agrees.
We would hope that such organizations would at least, as a primary concern, have the patients' health in mind. This could be true if no other incentives existed to stray from that goal. When income from endorsements, advertising and some personal incentives exist, there is, at least, the appearance if a conflict of interests. If they endorse a procedure or product about which they have some personal reservations, they can benefit in some way while at the same time avoid the potential harm of that procedure or product themselves.
This is just a glimpse of backroom power which exists in many areas which affect our daily lives and well being. Unless each legitimate voice is included in public policy making and allowed to function without fear of reprisals, freedom of choice with equal and unfettered access, we will forever be limited to whatever care someone else imposes on us.
In the human health field, there are many different, accepted approaches to dealing with the achieving, maintaining and restoring of health. Problems arise when the official policies of government agencies favors one over the other, often to the detriment of the others and, in the opinion of the others, patient care.
The inter-professional concerns are serious but are dwarfed by those of the intra-professional differences. For example, a national medical association which controls health issue policy for the government sets the rules for what is "standard practice". Any practitioner who varies from those because of personal preferences which are outside the formula, risks his license, law suits and a loss of privileges which endangers his ability to remain in practice. In some ways, this parallels the power of labor unions to force compliance among its members regardless of whether or not the member agrees.
We would hope that such organizations would at least, as a primary concern, have the patients' health in mind. This could be true if no other incentives existed to stray from that goal. When income from endorsements, advertising and some personal incentives exist, there is, at least, the appearance if a conflict of interests. If they endorse a procedure or product about which they have some personal reservations, they can benefit in some way while at the same time avoid the potential harm of that procedure or product themselves.
This is just a glimpse of backroom power which exists in many areas which affect our daily lives and well being. Unless each legitimate voice is included in public policy making and allowed to function without fear of reprisals, freedom of choice with equal and unfettered access, we will forever be limited to whatever care someone else imposes on us.
No comments:
Post a Comment