| |
June 1999
Volume 63 |
Number 6
|
| |
VENTILATIONS
|
| Share This Message
With A Colleague - Especially a Complacent One |
You are reading this editorial because:
- You are curious about the content
- You like what I write
- You hate what I write
- You have nothing else to read
Those not reading this editorial and other articles, messages,
homilies or pleas for professional society involvement are just
as varied. Many are either disinterested, complacent or disgruntled.
Nonetheless, I thought I would personalize what hundreds of your
colleagues do annually to keep the practice of anesthesiology
safe, accessible and appropriately reimbursable. Perhaps a stray
NEWSLETTER copy will find its way into the hands of a perpetually
despondent anesthesiologist.
It is 5 a.m. The alarm rings and I must quickly ready myself
for the 7 a.m. flight to Washington (or Albany for state issues).
I meet with our lobbyists having read 30-40 pages of position
papers, fact sheets or congressional bills (usually on the plane)
to strategize the best presentation of our message in a direct,
succinct way. Then, it is off to Capitol Hill (or the Albany Mall)
to meet with senators, congresspersons, various (and powerful)
aides or bureaucrats of key agencies. Political meetings fall
into three major categories: very positive, equivocal (useless)
or hostile. The last scenario with a confrontational assault on
our message is usually verbalized by legislative aides who know
both sides of the argument - and side with the opposition. It
takes a great deal of self-restraint and tact to present our concept
while parrying the opposition's allegations in a most cordial
repartee. Oftentimes, lunch is skipped or is ingested in the form
of a candy bar. After the meetings, a parting review of the day's
events and future strategic maneuvers are discussed while racing
off to catch the 4:45 p.m. flight.
Once at the airport, flights are not infrequently delayed (sometimes
even canceled). Returning home hungry and near bedtime becomes
the usual culmination of the day's events. I collect my thoughts,
prepare for tomorrow's clinical practice and retire.
I, and many of your colleagues across the country, sacrifice
precious time reserved for recreation or further education for
the benefit of all anesthesiologists and not just a particular
group. This process is often tiring, thankless and frustrating,
yet it is essential.
I do not like battling nurse anesthetists, HMOs, the Health
Care Financing Administration or trial lawyers. I would rather
play golf. I do not even need to do this personally because I
am established and a salaried professional employee. However,
I am compelled to do this because I have the opportunity, the
access and the obligation as a member of a relatively small cadre
of physicians engaged in similar practices with similar concerns.
What keeps people like me from throwing in the towel is a bit
of altruism mixed with a dash of idealism and a pinch of duty.
What douses my enthusiasm and sends me into a sense of nihilism
is the insensitivity of the time needs of "involved" physicians
and the lack of financial support by some of my constituents
to the various political action committees and to local supportive
politicians' fund-raising events. I get very frustrated by what
I perceive as a selfish, miserly, uncaring, egocentric and an
aloof lack of support by some practicing anesthesiologists. Often,
I feel that these constituents will get what they deserve (or
did not support) if their "house of cards" cascades down to further
restrict reimbursements or scope of supervision.
As always, I recover from this depression and return to provide
both my time and money to do verbal battle when called upon, similar
to the task of Sisyphus forever rolling the boulder up the hill
only to have it plummet to the base.
So please, for those of you reading this column who know colleagues
that perpetually "bellyache" and spew out negative comments while
shirking their time and money obligations to support their own
legislative causes, share this editorial with them and beseech
them to become a player, at least financially. Finally, if dramatic
negative changes occur in our practice, I know that I fully participated
financially and politically to parry the threat. I wonder how
the "nay-sayers" will respond to their involved colleagues
should we all become losers? What then would the cost and time
be to overturn existing new laws just to reinstate what we all
were too complacent to preserve?
- M.J.L.
return to top
|