Yes, you are missing something. Cuts to Doctors, it's all about their money. The AMA is for profit, they care little about the millions uninsured, or those under insured, or anything else, least of all Universal Health Care. They still will fight tooth and nail to keep up their snatch and grab game. Just try and put a harness on their run away costs, that are putting us all out of reach for Medical care. Are you really afraid of Socialized Medicine? most of the free World has it, these U.S. Doctors have gone Mansion nuts.
2007-07-04 08:28:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by song1709! 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
FDR had wanted to adopt a socialized medical system similar to Great Britain under the New Deal. However, the AMA fought against it and that's why we ended up with Medicaid/Medicare. Last I knew the AMA does NOT support socialized medicine.
Edit: I've reread your question. I'm glad that they are advocating for their doctors to still get paid, however that does not mean that they are advocating socialized medicine. If you study the history of socialized medicine in the US the AMA is one of the harshest critics and biggest roadblocks.
2007-07-04 15:11:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The AMA knows that many of the seniors who use medicare would not otherwise be able to pay. Hence, the doctors still get paid something reasonable under the program. Since the elderly get medical care, the doctors aren't under duress to give free care to them.
This is a case where they'd prefer to have care subsidized by the government instead of having the rug pulled out from under them. Doctors want people to remain ambivalent about Socialized medicine; they don't want rabid supporters. It's like in 18th century France. If King Louis had given the people a little more to eat, the Revolution would have died down.
The doctors probably know the old saying: "Pigs get fed while hogs get slaughtered".
2007-07-04 15:27:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Medicare is an overwhelming popular program that is extrememly efficient (1% overhead vs. 30% for our current system). Without it, insurance coverage for elderly people would be extremely rare and unaffordable. Maybe doctors actually do care that senior citizens can receive treatment. You think? If you want to call it socialist, go ahead, any senior citizens you might have in your family are probably very grateful for it. And it works pretty darn well.
2007-07-04 18:12:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jeff P 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
At least it starts a conversation, the system we have now is seriously flawed. Ask anyone with private health insurance who has to make extra appointments with the doctor for the insurance company to pay for because he needs a letter to the other branch of the insurance company that won't cover a particular medication without an extra note. I find it hard to believe that the government could screw it up any worse than private companies have already done.
2007-07-04 15:12:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by ash 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
No Doubt, Money, their Agenda is Money, Not Health, Contrary to their Charter BTW.
Mission Statement:
AMA mission
Mission: To promote the art and science of medicine and the betterment of public health.
Core Values: (1) Leadership; (2) Excellence; and (3) Integrity and Ethical Behavior.
Vision: To be an essential part of the professional life of every physician.
The American Medical Association helps doctors help patients by uniting physicians nationwide to work on the most important professional and public health issues.
AMA policy on issues in medicine and public health is decided through its democratic policy-making process, in the AMA House of Delegates.
The AMA's activities with for-profit entities are directed by AMA guidelines for corporate relationships, and its Internet products follow AMA guidelines for health and information Web sites. For information and inquires about advertising on the AMA’s Web site, please send an e-mail to webads@ama-assn.org.
Together, we will play an active role in shaping the future of medicine.
[AMA Ethical Statement:]
Principles of medical ethics
e-mail story | print story
Preamble
The medical profession has long subscribed to a body of ethical statements developed primarily for the benefit of the patient. As a member of this profession, a physician must recognize responsibility to patients first and foremost, as well as to society, to other health professionals, and to self. The following Principles adopted by the American Medical Association are not laws, but standards of conduct which define the essentials of honorable behavior for the physician.
Principles of medical ethics
A physician shall be dedicated to providing competent medical care, with compassion and respect for human dignity and rights.
A physician shall uphold the standards of professionalism, be honest in all professional interactions, and strive to report physicians deficient in character or competence, or engaging in fraud or deception, to appropriate entities.
A physician shall respect the law and also recognize a responsibility to seek changes in those requirements which are contrary to the best interests of the patient.
A physician shall respect the rights of patients, colleagues, and other health professionals, and shall safeguard patient confidences and privacy within the constraints of the law.
A physician shall continue to study, apply, and advance scientific knowledge, maintain a commitment to medical education, make relevant information available to patients, colleagues, and the public, obtain consultation, and use the talents of other health professionals when indicated.
A physician shall, in the provision of appropriate patient care, except in emergencies, be free to choose whom to serve, with whom to associate, and the environment in which to provide medical care.
A physician shall recognize a responsibility to participate in activities contributing to the improvement of the community and the betterment of public health.
A physician shall, while caring for a patient, regard responsibility to the patient as paramount.
A physician shall support access to medical care for all people.
Adopted by the AMA's House of Delegates June 17, 2001.
[Too Bad, but Apparently These Words Are for Show, BTW, In Defense of Real Doctors, In my Opinion, the Expense of the US Medical System is Not Due to What Real Doctors Make.]
2007-07-04 16:18:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
because the people are about to demand it
2007-07-04 15:31:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by Ringo G. 4
·
0⤊
0⤋