Saturday, December 31, 2011
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Continuing on with the discussion regarding issues of physical modesty in the context of medical care, there continues to be debate throughout these Volumes as to who is responsible for the contested inequalities in attention to these issues and what is necessary for the resolution of these issues. Is there a conflict between the male and female gender, working apart, in attaining their own individual modesty goals or should both genders look to each other's physical modesty needs and desires and stand and work together to change the medical care system to meet all their goals? I suspect the latter is the wisest. Perhaps the best suggestion for both genders to become active to the same cause and to get together on a website to develop tools for advocacy. I would suggest checking in at Suzy's site where the goal is to do just that. Here is her description of the Mission Statement and Goals:
We believe that each patient is an individual and as such has specific preferences and needs including what accommodations they require to maximize comfort when their modesty must be compromised in the medical experience. Our mission it to act as a liaison between patients and providers in establishing, understanding, and executing the policies and procedures essential to that end. When appropriate we will act as advocates for patients to achieve that goal through interaction, education, and referrals to both patients and providers.
GOALS: Our goal is to help patients achieve dignified and respectful healthcare through education and information. Everyone has different needs and expectations of their healthcare providers, and we provide choices and options in obtaining those needs. We understand that modesty, privacy, and respect are primary needs when facing procedures and we promote educating providers in the sensitivity of those needs.
But not just writing this protocol list to our blogs.. the final consensus list should be sent to Dr. Atui Gawande who wrote the article "Naked" in the New England Journal of Medicine and which was the basis for our entire series of Volumes on patient modesty. As some of you may know, Dr.Gawande is now a very well respected individual for his analysis and writings about a host of important medical issues that need fixing or change. By this project on our part, this may be the most direct way, through Dr.Gawande, to get something moving rather than repeated moaning and yearning on our blogs. How is that for an idea? Again, thanks Belinda for a suggestion to get us all "off our butts" (so to speak).
Graphic: "Man and Woman Apart and Together"-Classic icons modified by me with ArtRage.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Should all patients be given online access to their medical records? The British healthcare system is currently considering such a possibility. With electronic medical records progressively becoming the norm throughout the medical world, this access would be feasible but would it be wise? Certainly, there would be advantages to the patient who would readily see the written result of the office visit and could then, if necessary, confront the physician with corrections, additions and questions and in a timely fashion. But what are the negatives to such an idea beyond potential loss of patient privacy due to inappropriate or illegal computer access? For example, would this mean that the medical record would have to be written in words understandable by any patient rather than in more concise and professionally understandable terminology and thus perhaps degrade professional communication? Would such access more easily give rise to patients starting malpractice actions due to misunderstandings of what was written to the record? Could patient's be pressured by others (insurance companies or employers as examples) into providing access to the electronic records since they would be more readily available? What do you think? ..Maurice.
Sunday, December 4, 2011
In on ongoing legal challenge to the patent law which allows isolated human genes to be patented and which was previously overturned, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit of the United States returned a ruling earlier this year that these genes were not simply a product of nature, which would not be eligible for a patent, but indeed could be patented. So..who has the legal rights to that rare and valuable germ growing in your nose or that gene which was part of your body but the one that was recovered and used for, as an example, a genetic test for cancer? And beyond the law.. what are the ethics? What is the good vs bad, what is the right vs the wrong?