May 21, 2012

The doctor-lawyer double standard

Compared to doctors, lawyers donate 7.5 times as much to politicians in order to extract political favors. It’s no wonder the rules of the game in this country are stacked way in favor of lawyers. The next time you need a doctor or lawyer, you can judge for yourself if this difference is fair and ethical or not. For a detailed account, check out this excellent blog post.

  • Elizabeth

    What makes you think it’s to extract political favors? I’ve never received a political favor from a politician, but I donate because I think it’s an important part of the political process. Lawyers may be somewhat more attuned to “civic duty” because it’s more closely tied to their day-to-day work.

    I bet a lot of your patients are lawyers (since they are often affluent enough to afford reproductive services and they are more likely to delay childbearing due to the rigors of the profession). Are you contemptuous of their motives, too, or is the attitude reserved for the anonymous lawyer-boogymen that you don’t know personally?

    Dr. Wes, on the other hand, simply points out that lawyers have done a somewhat better job than doctors at effectively pricing their services (although some of his information is inaccurate – there are many areas of law practice that are not typically priced hourly, for example).

  • IVF-MD

    Thanks for the comment, Elizabeth. I am sharing my views on the injustices of the system and not directly against a group of people who have chosen a particular profession. Bravo to the legal profession who have successfully skewed the laws in their favor (ie no Loser-Pays policies). Many of my friends are lawyers and I agree that everybody has a right to try to bend the rules in their favor, but then it is also fair to expose things to the general public, to help them decide if they wish to vote for things to stay the same or to vote for necessary changes. Here is what I believe and you have the right to disagree. 1. The amount of money given to a political candidate influences their chances of winning 2. Politicians have the potential danger of being swayed by political contributions, leading them to vote for legislation that favors their big contributors rather than necessarily on what’s best for the American people as a whole. 3. Politicians have a duty to do what’s best for the country and not for an isolated special interest group. The first two factors can lead to the danger of our national policies decided by who gives the most money, therefore leading to "a form of pecuniary corruption, an act usually implying money or gift given that alters the behaviour of the recipient in ways not consistent with the duties of that person", which is essentially the definition of bribery. I know that some may argue that the first premise is false that money doesn’t affect elections. If so, then why do politicians spend so much time trying to raise funds? Some may argue tenet #2 and assert that politicians are ethically sound and would never base their votes on the wishes of those who give them money. Some may argue that politicians are not held to tenet #3. If you truly believe that, then I don’t think we will ever come to an agreement on this issue. As for the doctors not effectively pricing their services, I am really pointing out flaws in the system which affect my colleagues in other fields and not myself. I am not suffering any injustice personally as I know that the harder I work and the better the care I render, then the more my services are valued. This is not the case for my primary care colleagues. But the problem is not in their ability to price their services, as you say, it’s a flaw in their permissibility to price their services due to the constraints that the government puts on them through the reimbursement system. For now, most RE’s, dermatologists, plastic surgeons and vision correction surgeons are relatively immune from these injustices. Thanks for you comment =). Again, I respect your right to your opinions.