Doctor as Victim

Doctor as Victim

Dr. Diggs' rant concerning media distortions and drug industry greed is well documented. (Byron, Diggs, “No Transparency in Reporting,” Letter, Cambridge Chronicle, October 9, 2008) His questions about drug company lapdogs in the legislature are too kind.
But his plea on behalf of medical professionals as victims raises questions about his perspective. Diggs suggests doctors have no influence on public policy, or how journalists write about them. The AMA is one of the most powerful lobbies in the nation.

Doctors have a privileged position in society. They earn more money than most people. They get these perks because we expect that they will treat our illnesses when we get sick. Alas, they do not always do that. Whether they do good or harm has no effect on what pay and what privileges they enjoy.

Doctors sell their prestige signing (but not always writing) articles promoting drugs that have not been fully tested on humans. They exploit poor persons and taxpayers who subsidize health care for poor persons.

Why are law-abiding doctors silent when a negligent colleague kills a patient? Weeding out bad doctors would reduce malpractice insurance rates.

Regarding letters in medical journals who reads them besides drug companies and doctors? Why does Dr. Diggs refuse to recognize that doctors unlawfully discriminate in the way they treat persons with disabilities and poor persons?

http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1374043759/Letter-Cost-containment-No-thanks

Roy Bercaw - Editor ENOUGH ROOM

Thank you

Thank you

Thanks to the Cambridge Chronicle and Arlington Internist Byron Diggs for
drawing attention to the pervasive unlawful discrimination against persons with
disabilities. (BYRON R. DIGGS, Letter, "Letter-writer got it wrong," Cambridge
Chronicle, Jun 26, 2007, 28th print edition) I hope to see more.
Having intimate experience with schizophrenia Dr. Diggs surely supports
ending unlawful discrimination in providing health care to persons with
disabilities. That is the issue which began this discussion.
Thanks also to Dr. Diggs for his insights into my personal expression with
which he disagrees.

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

Letter: Letter-writer got it wrong
Cambridge Chronicle
Tue Jun 26, 2007, 05:36 PM EDT
Cambridge -

Roy Bercaw's enraged and nasty letter to the editor in the June 7 Chronicle
("Doctor�s bias undeniable") illustrates why his reality check keeps bouncing.
This person writes to the Chronicle often, and often unnecessarily, about
perceived threats to "persons with disabilities" from a myriad of agents, state,
local and federal, the MBTA, Cambridge, Harvard; his "enemies list" is long. Of
course, some offenses are real. But Bercaw seemingly writes of nothing else. I
note that few readers respond to his embarrassing tirades; we recognize his
letters to be a waste of time and trees.

To regain attention, he changes tactics - personal insults, distortion of what I
wrote, grandiose generalizations about doctors, journalists, et al. It is
annoying that I must defend myself against his misguided attacks; the imposed
400-word cap makes a comprehensive defense limited. Suffice to say that the
people who know me understand the ignorance of Bercaw's accusations.

In my letter to which Roy refers (Chronicle, May 31), I briefly discussed the
emergency treatment of "psych" patients in the ER, the increased risk of
violence against the patient or the staff, and the need for chemical or physical
restraint, sometimes necessary for a complete clinical assessment. My example of
an actively hallucinating, violently punching patient resisting urgently needed
evaluation and treatment is distorted by Bercaw to "' Diggs' stereotyp(ing) all
persons who arrive at the ER in an unconventional manner!" Bercaw's "example,"
"If a person with muscular dystrophy" is completely irrelevant.

For three decades, I have been an internal medicine specialist, with interest
and experience in the medical care of psychiatric patients. Several members of
my extended family were diagnosed with schizophrenia in their early 20s.

Bercaw confuses and lumps together two different situations. One scenario
involves the news of stable, mentally ill patients being �released� into the
community and met with fear, suspicion and resistance. This is prejudicial
behavior; studies show that stable, mentally ill patients are no more dangerous
than others. The second scenario involves psych patients brought to the ER.
Often, not always, such patients are unstable and dangerous to themselves and/or
staff members. The potential for violence is real, and as well designed studies
show, more likely than those in the general ER population. Bercaw�s fear of this
reality, suspicion of medical staff, and resistance to understanding what is
obvious will always remain a mystery.
BYRON R. DIGGS, MD
Arlington

Doctor’s Bias Undeniable

Doctor’s Bias Undeniable

[Published in print edition June 7, 2007, online June 5, 2007]
Cambridge Chronicle
Tue Jun 05, 2007, 05:05 PM EDT
http://www.townonline.com/cambridge/opinions/x1121275257
Cambridge -

Byron Diggs’ denial is not unique among medical professionals who seldom admit
their negative bias toward persons with disabilities. Who would believe that
doctors are prejudiced? Ahem! (Byron R. Diggs, “Psychiatric care needs medical
care,” letter, Cambridge Chronicle, May 31). This doctor celebrates and boasts
of his bias.

Diggs declares that statements with which he disagrees are inaccurate and
distorted, showing his intolerance. Diggs denies that he suggested that all
persons with disabilities are violent by citing two extreme cases of criminal
acts. But that is what journalists, police and prosecutors do all of the time.
Diggs is part of the clueless majority hateful population who fear and demonize
persons with disabilities.

Medical professionals are a major barrier to persons with disabilities being
treated the same as ordinary persons. Diggs is unaware that saying his “answer
contended that such patients are potentially dangerous,” shows his prejudice.
How are persons with disabilities more potentially dangerous than the rest of
the population? They are only so in Diggs’ biased mind.

Diggs shows intolerance by stereotyping all persons who arrive at the ER in an
unconventional manner. If a person with muscular dystrophy who uses a wheelchair
arrived at the ER, would Diggs forcibly drug him because he was unable to walk
and acted funny? Diggs is unable to perceive that being upset may be a person’s
disability. He equates being upset to violence and crime. He recognizes that
there may be other reasons than psychiatric causes. But he asserts, “Such
patients are suffering greatly and out of control.” Oh?

Diggs would never generalize about women, homosexuals or blacks as he does about
persons with disabilities. That is evidence of his prejudice. He needs some
sensitivity training. Shame on this clueless, prejudiced doctor.
ROY BERCAW, Editor ENOUGH ROOM