Do all doctors tell the truth?

A few years ago, an associate professor in one of the most prestigious medical schools in the country received a letter from a US health care company eliminating him from its provider network. The largest HMO on the east coast gave no reason for the firing, but the doctor thought this has something to do with his public criticisms about HMOs. He reveals to many people about how this HMO only goes for profit up to the point of putting the client's health at risk by rewarding doctors who deny them the care that they need and coercing them to sign a gag clause as part of their company's touchstone contract. More information on the topic of medical jobs is located at doctor job.

Upon signing the contract, all physicians are made to never undergo any form of action or communication that will turn away any potential or existing enrollees as well as their superiors, members of their union or belittle the quality of the coverage but most importantly they are to keep these terms extremely under wraps. In simpler words, any doctor who reveals things that the HMO won't approve of will be fired quickly.

In the present medical situation, where profit is the bottom line, these policies implemented by HMOs prevent doctors from giving the real score on patient's diagnoses, prognoses and other options for cure. Consider the following hypothetical examples of what could happen when doctors are muzzled.

The mammogram results of a 49-year-old lady shows evidence of a vague shadow. The cancerous mass found from the examination on the lady urged the doctor to do a retesting to see if the troubling result is just a machine error. The thing is, the HMO does not cover this anymore. A criticism against the quality of care the HMO gives could be construed from advising a patient to have another mammogram somewhere else. After six months, the patient is recommended to be back for another check-up to lessen the findings. Sadly, that six months could be extremely critical if the woman does indeed have breast cancer. Thank you for reading about medical recruitment in australia and medical jobs.

The 60-year-old man needs to undergo an operation to relieve the obstruction caused by an enlarged prostate. Less blood loss, less pain, risk of infection or impotence are the advantages of the new laser technique that the man's surgeon is considering to use on him. But then it is sad that it is only when the patient goes through a riskier invasive operation can he get benefits from the HMO. The surgeon could be fired if he insists to his patient to undergo the new surgery and persuade in order to ask permission from the HMO.

A 35-year-old woman is suffering from severe depression. The physician aimed to make her ingest a medicine that won't give any side effects or a chance of death from a self administered overdoes. However, the HMO has agreed to push for the drug that has so many side effects as well as the chance of death from overdose. The doctor is encouraging her to buy the better brand by herself. After he had signed the contract, his mouth is silenced. Only patients who are informed well are the ones who make sound health care choices.

Even the smartest consumers still need doctors to explain to them the complex and rapid advances in the medical strata. Patients relying on their doctors will have an unfavorable health fate if their doctors cannot be honest to them. With this current situation, it is not wise for patients to stick to what all their doctors are telling them.

Such unjust gag orders are being voted against in California by a consumer watchdog group as well as the state's nurse association. HMO patients can now consult their physicians through their professional associations, legislation and public education. Many medical practitioners must learn to be like this brave man who although sacked from his work, was able to reveal the unfair practices done by HMOs. Upon reviewing his contract on health care, he removed the gag clause before sending it back to the sender.

Gag orders found within HMO contracts contradict the basic tenets of medicine's Hippocratic Oath which revolves around physicians prescribing what is best for the patient according to his judgment and ability as well as never causing harm on anyone. How can physicians possibly stomach putting his patients at risk when he once promised that he will prioritize their health and wellness?