To the Editor:
“As Physicians’ Jobs Change, So Do Their Politics” (“Doctors Inc.” series, front page, May 30) illustrates the fallacy of the doctor-entrepreneur as a model for the delivery of ethical health care in the 21st century.
Doctors have a duty to advocate for their patients, both individually in their offices and collectively in the debate about the provision of health care to society.
In both instances, when a doctor’s concerns about his “small business” conflict with what is best for a patient, the doctor should choose to serve the patient’s best interest.
The use of unindicated tests, invasive procedures and antibiotics are the potential result of a doctor-entrepreneur protecting the wrong interest.
MICHAEL E. SHAPIRO
Hackensack, N.J., May 31, 2011
The writer is the chief of organ transplantation at Hackensack University Medical Center.
Note from KBJ: Nobody disputes that the duty of a doctor is to advocate for his or her patients. The dispute is about whether socialized medicine is in the best interests of patients. The letter writer goes no way toward showing that it is.
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 