Examining our “Oath”
My blog post a few days ago on the upcoming vote on the tentative physicians services agreement has definitely stirred up emotions on both sides of the argument of whether or not to support the agreement. Those in the “NO” side have accused me of being naive, not knowing the true nature of how negotiations work, having outdated thinking, being a socialist and of course all of this shouted out IN CAPS in case I missed their point.
Specifically the idea from the last line of the blog where I suggest that we act/vote so that we can “get down to the urgent work at hand - for our patients.” has drawn out a lot of emotion.
In my opinion, supporting the tentative physician services agreement is in the best interests of our patients. This is a risk that a rejection of the agreement could lead to further unilateral cuts to the system. I think people may argue about the level of that risk. But can one really dispute that this risk of further unilateral cuts (voting NO) is not greater than if we shifted our stance from an adversarial to a partner position with the government (voting YES). Cuts to the system, will impact our patients resulting in longer wait times and decreased access and delaying the opportunity to improve the system.
I don’t think any physician can argue that acting in the best interests of our patients is our primary responsibility - we all pledged to honour the oath we undertook in med school.
Was it just platitudes then or have we lost some of that love of why we are doing this work in the first place? I would argue that the vast majority of us are in the latter category - overwhelmed with the day to day challenges of caring for our patients, dealing with the “system” (ie working for the “MAN”) and getting our kids to soccer practice.
I believe that challenge we all face is taking a few moments to reflect on what brings us joy in our work. For me, it still is the healing interaction with my patient. Vote YES.