|
|
|
|
|
by MAGZine
1830 days ago
|
|
You literally contradicted yourself. They are legally AND morally obligated to provide you with the best care society can provide. Not only can they be sued for malpractice, but they could lose their license entirely. Losing their only means of making money sounds like strong incentive, not to mention it would require violating an oath that doctors take VERY seriously. And for what motive? And yes, you should know your personal/family physician well. That's the whole point. They should be able to offer you personalized, cohesive care with continuity. They should be able to advise you on your own specific condition. If you choose to neglect their advice, do not disparage them. If your views do not reflect the best practice of medicine, that's on you. They have no incentive to injure you, and implying otherwise is extremely disingenuous. Note, I'm not saying you can't have these views, don't just attack others baselessly in order to defend those views. |
|
Sure, the legal and moral obligation to provide care exists but it did not prevent the opioid epidemic. It turned out that systemic controls and criminal penalties were needed to prevent doctors from overprescribing certain drugs.
Doctors are generally great and don’t deserve to be disparaged, but they are humans and as fallible as the rest of us. Choosing not to trust all doctors is not rational, and adopting a “trust, but verify” approach to medical advice is rational.