Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Doctor Frustrations
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marguerite" data-source="post: 369707" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>EB, I agree with you. The doctor HAS to know, because some patients at least, would have used subsequent appointments to get a message across.</p><p></p><p>What SHOULD happen - you're at your appointment, you tell the doctor, "I saw Dr X (specialist) last month," and the doctor says, "I haven't received a letter from him yet." Then doctor gets onto intercom and says to staff, "Please check the files and see if letter from Dr X is there, it has been sent and should have been received already."</p><p>When staff come back and say., "letter from Dr X is not there," then the doctor should say to them, "Then get on the phone to Dr X's office now, immediately,while this patient is sitting here, and get them to fax a copy across."</p><p></p><p>Even if the doctor doesn't do this, there mus tbe enough patients complaining about her staff, at their next appointments, for her to know at some level that there is a problem. But the doctor has a quit life away from patients' problems. And, sorry to say, a lot of doctors take up medicine because they have a phobia about illness and disease; they want to do something about eradicating it all. A lot of medical conferences are set up so patients are nowhere in sight. They use it as an advertising point. I wangled my way into a medical conference or two, as a patient advocate. One I got into had clearly specified "health professionals only" and when I turned up, the officials there (who knew me, but didn't know I HAD professional cred of a sort) tried to have me thrown out. The irony was - the organisers who wanted me gone, and less professional cred than I had, but were allowed to stay. But the keynote speaker, who had invited me there, came over and welcomed me, which really frustrated the officials on so many levels. </p><p></p><p>The fear is, that if/when doctors mix with patients not fully professionally, that the armchair consultations begin to happen. But I learnt very early, that when I meet doctors NOT in a capacity is patient-doctor, I MUST avoid talking about my own health. Even the local GP, when we bump into one another in the street, who asks me, "How are you?" in polite conversation, knows to not ask me because I will refuse to answer. Or they get the noncommital one-word answer.</p><p></p><p>Nurses in the practice need to insulate their doctors form anything inappropriate or time-wasting. But it sounds like these nurses are a tad too power-hungry. It also sounds very inappropriate and major breaches of confidentiality.</p><p></p><p>I had a problem with one local doctor, some years ago. That doctor then split with the practice I had been part of for years. A messy split. The new practice was hallmarked by some very bad behaviour form the nurse-receptionist (the schism doctor's wife) who encouraged (and often started) untrue gossip about the original doctor. It was vicious, it was unethical and it was damaging. Any supporters of the original doctor were also gossiped about, and I know there were things about me that were spread around the town. I complained officially but there wasn't enough solid evidence, although I had a lot of circumstantial evidence and witnesses. The schism doctor and his wife left town, but maintained ownership of the new practice building. That meant that until they ceded ownership, they could walk back in at any time and read the files. I didn't trust them, so I avoided visiting that practice because my list of medications would be enough to do a lot of damage to my reputation if it got out into the wrong hands.</p><p></p><p>That said - my complaint was based on known and obvious breaches in ethics, especially confidentiality. There are strict laws on this in Australia and I find it hard to believe that regulations in the US would be softer on this. I would at least be putting in a phone call to the medical board, and asking what you can do in this situation - your specialists' letters aren't being filed, the nurses aren't passing on your messages and you have been told by a former staff member that patients are often gossiped about and actively blocked from access to the doctor.</p><p></p><p>Then see what the board says.</p><p></p><p>The other method of tying to get to the doctor - passing over an "eyes only" letter - doesn't work, I know from experience. We have a political system here where you can have access to various Ministers. You write to the Minister (for Education, for example) and you get a reply. But the reply is usually written by a public servant; the Minister might sign it personally (but usually doesn't) but rarely reads it all. So you wonder - is tis the genuine attitude of the Minister? Or is it the "Sir Humphrey" (public servant) response?</p><p></p><p>I was part of an activist group years ago when my kids were little, trying to get better childcare facilities. I had written to the Minister and got a Sir Humphrey reply. Legally, that was all I had to be given. But then the Minister was due to open our new child care centre - so I turned up, with my letter. I handed it directly to the Minister, who thanked me - and then immediately turned and handed my letter, unopened, to the "Sir Humphrey" standing at his shoulder. Like the Queen's ladies-in-waiting who carry the many bouquets, flowers, cards etc handed to the Queen as she's walking around, these accompanying people of the Minster field the stuff handed over and put it all in the same pigeonhole when they get back, as all the other incoming mail.</p><p></p><p>I have since managed to achieve amazing things through Ministerial involvement, but I had to find a way around the officials. The most effective way was the personal connection - I made friends with another politician, who made a point of personally handing over my letter to the Minister with a lecture about the issue. It's not the sort of trick you can pull too often, so you should only use it for something really important.</p><p></p><p>There are too many reasons for you to move on. This doctor would have to be exceptionally brilliant, to justify staying with this practice. And frankly, the behaviour of the nurses shouldn't be possible if the doctor is sufficiently competent.</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 369707, member: 1991"] EB, I agree with you. The doctor HAS to know, because some patients at least, would have used subsequent appointments to get a message across. What SHOULD happen - you're at your appointment, you tell the doctor, "I saw Dr X (specialist) last month," and the doctor says, "I haven't received a letter from him yet." Then doctor gets onto intercom and says to staff, "Please check the files and see if letter from Dr X is there, it has been sent and should have been received already." When staff come back and say., "letter from Dr X is not there," then the doctor should say to them, "Then get on the phone to Dr X's office now, immediately,while this patient is sitting here, and get them to fax a copy across." Even if the doctor doesn't do this, there mus tbe enough patients complaining about her staff, at their next appointments, for her to know at some level that there is a problem. But the doctor has a quit life away from patients' problems. And, sorry to say, a lot of doctors take up medicine because they have a phobia about illness and disease; they want to do something about eradicating it all. A lot of medical conferences are set up so patients are nowhere in sight. They use it as an advertising point. I wangled my way into a medical conference or two, as a patient advocate. One I got into had clearly specified "health professionals only" and when I turned up, the officials there (who knew me, but didn't know I HAD professional cred of a sort) tried to have me thrown out. The irony was - the organisers who wanted me gone, and less professional cred than I had, but were allowed to stay. But the keynote speaker, who had invited me there, came over and welcomed me, which really frustrated the officials on so many levels. The fear is, that if/when doctors mix with patients not fully professionally, that the armchair consultations begin to happen. But I learnt very early, that when I meet doctors NOT in a capacity is patient-doctor, I MUST avoid talking about my own health. Even the local GP, when we bump into one another in the street, who asks me, "How are you?" in polite conversation, knows to not ask me because I will refuse to answer. Or they get the noncommital one-word answer. Nurses in the practice need to insulate their doctors form anything inappropriate or time-wasting. But it sounds like these nurses are a tad too power-hungry. It also sounds very inappropriate and major breaches of confidentiality. I had a problem with one local doctor, some years ago. That doctor then split with the practice I had been part of for years. A messy split. The new practice was hallmarked by some very bad behaviour form the nurse-receptionist (the schism doctor's wife) who encouraged (and often started) untrue gossip about the original doctor. It was vicious, it was unethical and it was damaging. Any supporters of the original doctor were also gossiped about, and I know there were things about me that were spread around the town. I complained officially but there wasn't enough solid evidence, although I had a lot of circumstantial evidence and witnesses. The schism doctor and his wife left town, but maintained ownership of the new practice building. That meant that until they ceded ownership, they could walk back in at any time and read the files. I didn't trust them, so I avoided visiting that practice because my list of medications would be enough to do a lot of damage to my reputation if it got out into the wrong hands. That said - my complaint was based on known and obvious breaches in ethics, especially confidentiality. There are strict laws on this in Australia and I find it hard to believe that regulations in the US would be softer on this. I would at least be putting in a phone call to the medical board, and asking what you can do in this situation - your specialists' letters aren't being filed, the nurses aren't passing on your messages and you have been told by a former staff member that patients are often gossiped about and actively blocked from access to the doctor. Then see what the board says. The other method of tying to get to the doctor - passing over an "eyes only" letter - doesn't work, I know from experience. We have a political system here where you can have access to various Ministers. You write to the Minister (for Education, for example) and you get a reply. But the reply is usually written by a public servant; the Minister might sign it personally (but usually doesn't) but rarely reads it all. So you wonder - is tis the genuine attitude of the Minister? Or is it the "Sir Humphrey" (public servant) response? I was part of an activist group years ago when my kids were little, trying to get better childcare facilities. I had written to the Minister and got a Sir Humphrey reply. Legally, that was all I had to be given. But then the Minister was due to open our new child care centre - so I turned up, with my letter. I handed it directly to the Minister, who thanked me - and then immediately turned and handed my letter, unopened, to the "Sir Humphrey" standing at his shoulder. Like the Queen's ladies-in-waiting who carry the many bouquets, flowers, cards etc handed to the Queen as she's walking around, these accompanying people of the Minster field the stuff handed over and put it all in the same pigeonhole when they get back, as all the other incoming mail. I have since managed to achieve amazing things through Ministerial involvement, but I had to find a way around the officials. The most effective way was the personal connection - I made friends with another politician, who made a point of personally handing over my letter to the Minister with a lecture about the issue. It's not the sort of trick you can pull too often, so you should only use it for something really important. There are too many reasons for you to move on. This doctor would have to be exceptionally brilliant, to justify staying with this practice. And frankly, the behaviour of the nurses shouldn't be possible if the doctor is sufficiently competent. Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Doctor Frustrations
Top