http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2014/09/hard-truths-dispelling-10-health-care-myths.html
Here we go again. The long and short of this discussion is that Family Practice must inevitably become a dying area of practice; b/c this is economically what the market is demanding. But if you make that jump, then listen, how is it any more worthwhile for people to go the extra miles for IM or IM-Peds, for example? How will compensation for them be much better?
And really, will there be enough NPs or PAs going into FP or Primary Care to make up for this? And will they REALLY be able to handle the many more complex cases--and there are so many complex cases and cases with co-morbid risk factors. As such, this makes use of NP or PA for these patients/clients a waste! And if NPs and PAs are taking on these kinds of cases, which there are more and more prevalent d/t advances in medical science/disease-understanding--and also the aging population, I cannot say I support tort reform anymore. Why? Well, I think there will be a lot of lawsuits when you push these more complex clients on to NPs and PAs--and in those cases, I say high damages will probably be justified--b/c in reality, the NPs and PAs are/will practicing far outside their scope of practice--based on education and supervised, clinical experiences and board standards!!!! But of course NP and PA penalties will be limited, b/c the government will be controlling this and limiting/capping their pay -outs. This is wrong!!! They shouldn't be taking on the kinds of clients to which I am referring--and such clients are a growing percentage of primary care today!
Here we go again. The long and short of this discussion is that Family Practice must inevitably become a dying area of practice; b/c this is economically what the market is demanding. But if you make that jump, then listen, how is it any more worthwhile for people to go the extra miles for IM or IM-Peds, for example? How will compensation for them be much better?
And really, will there be enough NPs or PAs going into FP or Primary Care to make up for this? And will they REALLY be able to handle the many more complex cases--and there are so many complex cases and cases with co-morbid risk factors. As such, this makes use of NP or PA for these patients/clients a waste! And if NPs and PAs are taking on these kinds of cases, which there are more and more prevalent d/t advances in medical science/disease-understanding--and also the aging population, I cannot say I support tort reform anymore. Why? Well, I think there will be a lot of lawsuits when you push these more complex clients on to NPs and PAs--and in those cases, I say high damages will probably be justified--b/c in reality, the NPs and PAs are/will practicing far outside their scope of practice--based on education and supervised, clinical experiences and board standards!!!! But of course NP and PA penalties will be limited, b/c the government will be controlling this and limiting/capping their pay -outs. This is wrong!!! They shouldn't be taking on the kinds of clients to which I am referring--and such clients are a growing percentage of primary care today!
Last edited: