Rising Medical Malignant Adocacy

 

        Over the last several years, I have noticed a growing number of distrustful and/or confused patients become anxious regarding their laid-out medical management or proposed treatment plans.  And rightfully so, and while the reasons can be many, none could be more detrimental than very opinionated non-APPs. This (unconscious) growing pernicious behavior committed by kindred allied healthcare peers. They reason questioning the established care plan is viewed as patient-centric care when reality may not be in many instances. It saddens & disturbs me greatly to see a soaring schism occurring amongst ourselves. It seems that in our daily advocate care-giving roles, we have started to take our roles of “educators” way too seriously. In other words, we have crossed the lines of being helpful to actually becoming hinderers when providing discrepant opinions of the already prescribed outlined  medical care activities.

        Moreover, when we disparage or disagree with other providers proposed treatment plans we immediately plant the seed of distrust in the patient’s minds. So how can we expect or demand patient compliance? After all, wasn’t it us with our ill-advice, of the treatment intervention that caused the misunderstanding and/or their confusion?

        Case in point, I have witnessed many instances in which a provider inadvertently undermined a surgeon’s proposed surgical intervention by disagreeing with a particular approach and taken the liberty to emphatically recommend a different course. Or even a Respiratory Therapist openly disagree with a pulmonologist’s treatment or drug choices selected. Or simply a nurse suggesting a patient or family that the proposed diagnostic intervention in her eyes is unnecessary or too risky for the patient’s age.

         We must be reserved and cautious when freely “dispensing medical advice” to our patients. It is incumbent in us that we must respect the physician-patient relationship or other providers/consultants recommendations. Sure, there are always exceptions to the rule, but this advocacy style could get many entangled in the legal system. An adversarial system in which an allegation of “practicing medicine” without a license could be easily entertained, considered and brought against the healthcare provider regardless of how well were the intentions at the time behind the advise, the opinion or even the recommendation.

        This unintentional or intentional behavior can have significant negative repercussions from perpetuating a fragmented industry to the already mentioned confusion and distrust due to a divisiveness  of opinion that already gives us a bad name --kind of an “us vs. them” mentality. Patients don’t want to have to choose, under duress, or have any more confusion than they may have had before our divisive advocacy came into play.

        If  individually the same amount of energy & effort was spent getting along and trying to build ONE great, seamless healthcare industry on all fronts, instead of wasting that energy on pettiness, not only everyone would prosper, but our fragmented industry would soar to new levels. Patients would have less angst when entrusting their care, their lives to their healthcare team members. 

                                                                                     # # #