MEDICAL NONSENSE NOT CONFINED TO CONGRESS

Now that the Leninist approach to medical planning has stalled - not that they've surrendered; be alert for House/Senate sneak attacks - liberals are notorious cheaters - other suggestions are surfacing. They prove that Congress has no patent on ill-advised schemes.

I saw some proposals that he considered key from an M.D. One was the limitation of malpractice suit amounts. This was necessary, he said, because it drives physicians out of practice, and if many more patients are to enter the system, we need more of them, not fewer. A couple of obvious truths apparently are needed.

1. Most malpractice suits are NOT frivolous. Listen to some of the medical atrocities perpetrated upon us by physicians, and you'll decide many of the awards are not nearly large enough.

2. Lawsuits are our only defense against incompetent practitioners, because the AMA steadfastly refuses to police and regulate its own members, and whether an AMA member or not, each is a stalwart defender of the rest of the crowd.

The corollary about being faced with prospects of tens of millions of new patients doesn't signify, because are we supposed to believe they are presently NOT in the system? Of course they are; they run to ER's for their needs, including crapulous headaches.

However, AMEN, I say, we NEED more physicians - now, in fact. Why must I schedule an internist, a dermatologist, or a urologist MONTHS in advance? This is the OLD system, the "ancien regime," RIGHT? Therefore, why not allow MORE students into medical schools as opposed to limiting the numbers strenuously?

Please don't try to frighten me about the consequent deterioration of medical care, when often now I'm lucky to see an NP or worse, a PA, someone with a degree in music or history, perhaps, and a couple of years' training. Further, before replying that only the very best emerge, take a close look at some of the dud MD's treating us.

This is the age of Affirmative Action, right? We systematically lower our standards to allow people to do work for which they are unqualified - it's our way of life - but I'm NOT suggesting ANY lowering of standards; rather just lowering the artificially-set hurdles that discourage or prevent students' applying to medical schools. Do you suppose there would be no takers for the profession that has done everything under the sun to style itself the most prestigious and generally wealthy in this country? Get serious. That's the reason for the hurdles, correct? If lots more doc's are prowling the streets, there might be a decrease in average income.

One impediment traditionally placed in the way was the requirement of an "A" in undergraduate Organic Chemistry, often a very tough course. Med school hopefuls just as traditionally scheme, cheat, and do anything to get that "A," but go check how many of the graduated physicians know carbon from nitrogen.

Wouldn't more MD's mean competition, which would reduce costs, and aren't high medical costs the principal motivation for all this congressional noise? Why must they all be rich? In other countries that's not the case, so why here?