I think if doctors were bothered about getting sued, they’d be more conscientious and do something to help us. I think the opposite is true, nobody bothers to sue them, so where’s the risk ? There’s obviously very little internal monitoring, so basically, if they turn up for work, listen to the patient, dish out a few pills (so long as the pills aren’t harmful) they get paid regardless, whether what they have done for the patient is successful or not. There is no incentive to cure us, or even attempt to lessen our symptoms, they just carry on regardless, knowing they are on a win:win. The system is all wrong!
They ought to have to complete some kind of feedback e.g.
Patient X reports symptoms a,b,c,d,e,f,g they were given XXX drug and symptoms are gone
or
Patient X reports symptoms a,b,c,d,e,f,g they were given XXX drug and d,e,f, symptoms persist,
therefore given ZZZ drug and referred to Cardiologistand so on and so forth until ALL symptoms are dealt with.
Certainly something better than what we have now!
Regards
Barbara
(UK)
hi Barbara,
In the states to many frivolous malpractice suits have been filed. Making doctors not wanting to spend the time on difficult patients. We are instead referred to so and so. Without anyone looking at the big picture. Now doctors are forced to see 6 to 10 patients an hour. As you can imagine that does not work. They don’t want to take on patients that are hard personalities and hard disease because that takes up to much time. I have now been to two geneticist, but neither will manage me. My poor PCP is nice, but she is no expert on EDS. I am not going to get political here, but all that you complain about in the UK is starting here in the USA. Medicine needs to change. It is stuck with old ideas and needs to catch up with the latest technology. It needs to be about costumer service and run like a business. Competition forces doctors to stay up to date and keeps them from being lazy.
Shonda