Should doctors be paid only if the patient is cured?

[jacklambert58]

Wrong. Learn to spell. Or maybe get your money back from your grade school teachers.

come on, u can troll better than that. At least bring up the role of insurance companies breaking the patient - doc link or something.

I'm disappointed in ur toll abilities if all u can talk about is spelling on a smart phone.....ur def no scubastevo when it comes to trolling.....

[Procrustes]

IRL doctor checking in.

I'm not going to say very much because most of it has already been said. I'll just say that the OP's expectations are rediculous and that he seems have a bit of a chip on his shoulder against MD's.

...which is interesting, because he said that he has many MD family members. I'm betting that his issues stem from some sort of family issue/resentment/inferiority complex rather than an actual issue with the quality of healthcare.

Thanks for the cheap ad hominem. I don't have issues with MD's. I have issues with incompetent MD's

[BigTrojan]

It is enlightening that the notion of how complex human body is getting its deserved spotlight here. If it is immensely complex and results of treatments involve luck, then doctors definitely should not be getting compensated regardless of result. That is like the house winning in every poker hand. If you refuse to see the 305 patient, then more competent one will see the patient for added fees.

And they go to this more competent doctor, and if he tries everything within his power to no avail, well too bad, you didn't make any money today. If I were a doctor, I would have little incentive to try new procedures. I would likely just stick with 2-3 procedures, and I would undoubtedly charge more for every procedure I do to make up for the money I miss out on when some procedures aren't successful. Sounds great!

[Procrustes]

And they go to this more competent doctor, and if he tries everything within his power to no avail, well too bad, you didn't make any money today. If I were a doctor, I would have little incentive to try new procedures. I would likely just stick with 2-3 procedures, and I would undoubtedly charge more for every procedure I do to make up for the money I miss out on when some procedures aren't successful. Sounds great!

A doctor would have all the incentive in the world to innovate, provide better service or cut costs (or do all three) precisely because the competition between doctors for "easy" patients would rise. Since as in your illustration, the incompetent ones fill prefer and flock to straightforward shut-and-close cases. Low-hanging fruit vs high-hanging ones. It is the high-hanging ones require effort and skill, thus again those who can provide the effort and skill should be rewarded more. What is so hard to understand about doctors competing to earn your business?

[BigTrojan]

A doctor would have all the incentive in the world to innovate, provide better service or cut costs (or do all three) precisely because the competition between doctors for "easy" patients would rise. Since as in your illustration, the incompetent ones fill prefer and flock to straightforward shut-and-close cases. Low-hanging fruit vs high-hanging ones. It is the high-hanging ones require effort and skill, thus again those who can provide the effort and skill should be rewarded more. What is so hard to understand about doctors competing to earn your business?

They wouldn't have all the incentive in the world if they know they don't get paid unless they cure the patient. They know how unpredictable the human body can be. I agree with the 2nd half of your post, though. Doctors can keep up with and distribute their success rates to patients if they please. Competition is great, but that doesn't mean you don't pay a doctor who tried their hardest but weren't able to cure the patient.

[Procrustes]

They wouldn't have all the incentive in the world if they know they don't get paid unless they cure the patient. They know how unpredictable the human body can be. I agree with the 2nd half of your post, though. Doctors can keep up with and distribute their success rates to patients if they please. Competition is great, but that doesn't mean you don't pay a doctor who tried their hardest but weren't able to cure the patient.

They shouldn't have any incentive to practice medicine, to begin with, if they can't show results with "easy/textbook" cases: the cancer patient that comes in with early detection etc.

[frankstomp]

They are there to save lives and they do their best to do that. i think they should be payed nor matter what the situation might be

[Procrustes]

[BigTrojan]

Good video, but I don't see any indication of this insinuating doctors shouldn't be paid if the patient isn't cured. We all know medicine is far from cut and dry like car repair.

[smokeater]

You left out the emergency criteria

What makes an emergency different from a non emergency? Keep in mind that what is considered an emergency differs from person to person. To many cancer patients making their chemo appointment is every bit an emergency as many who visit an ER for an acute problem.