deleted

[305985]

---

Members do not see this ad.

deleted

 

[phospho]

Will you join?

OMG!!! are you kidding me??? ofcourse!

The AMA wants 60 bucks or so for an annual membership fee... how could you turn that down??? they're gonna give you some free netters flashcards!!! beat that!!! (they're 25 bucks on amazon)

I'm gonna be a DOCTOR!!! the AMA = "doctoring" = me. As soon as I got my acceptance, I joined as many medical student and medical organizations as I could! You know that crap that falls out everytime you open one of them AAFP magazines? I filled out every single one of them too!

And that's not even half the story!! I am now part of the A.... M.... A..... !!! "M" stands for MEDICAL!!!

oh yeah baby!

 

[AlexMorph]

Why is physician membership in the AMA so low? Will you join?

That is because many doctors feel the AMA doesn't really represent their interests and viewpoints.

 

[Cyradis]

Not an actual med student until August - but I saw this thread and had to respond.

So... people aren't interested in joining the AMA because the AMA doesn't represent their concerns - and it doesn't represent their concerns because not enough MDs are in it.

Wouldn't it make more sense if more people joined the AMA in order to make it represent their concerns? The AMA is among the most powerful lobbying groups in the country...

Yes I plan to join the AMA.

 

[AlexMorph]

Not an actual med student until August - but I saw this thread and had to respond.

So... people aren't interested in joining the AMA because the AMA doesn't represent their concerns - and it doesn't represent their concerns because not enough MDs are in it.

Wouldn't it make more sense if more people joined the AMA in order to make it represent their concerns? The AMA is among the most powerful lobbying groups in the country...

Yes I plan to join the AMA.

Lets us know about the results of your lobbying next year as an M1. Hope you can bring about the change you are looking for.

 

[waterhammer]

Not an actual med student until August - but I saw this thread and had to respond.

So... people aren't interested in joining the AMA because the AMA doesn't represent their concerns - and it doesn't represent their concerns because not enough MDs are in it.

Wouldn't it make more sense if more people joined the AMA in order to make it represent their concerns? The AMA is among the most powerful lobbying groups in the country...

Yes I plan to join the AMA.

Yes, but until a majority of physicians who support your own views join the AMA, you are paying dues to an organization that may be lobbying for the exact opposite of what you want.

Also, in my own experience it seems like half the physicians I worked with supported Obamacare and the other half did not. How would the AMA be able to reconcile such contradictory stances from its members(assuming that most/all physicians become members)?

 

[AlexMorph]

Yes, but until a majority of physicians who support your own views join the AMA, you are paying dues to an organization that may be lobbying for the exact opposite of what you want.

Also, in my own experience it seems like half the physicians I worked with supported Obamacare and the other half did not. How would the AMA be able to reconcile such contradictory stances from its members(assuming that most/all physicians become members)?

This is what ends up happening. So, physicians join groups that represent their own specialty or whatever. This way, you have a much greater chance of contributing to a cause you can actually get behind.

 

[Cyradis]

Lets us know about the results of your lobbying next year as an M1. Hope you can bring about the change you are looking for.

I get what you're saying - I don't think I'm going to be able to get everything I want done in first year - or ever for that matter.

My point is more that you have a better chance of steering the AMA in the direction you want it to go if you're a member than not.

 

[MilkmanAl]

Not an actual med student until August - but I saw this thread and had to respond.

So... people aren't interested in joining the AMA because the AMA doesn't represent their concerns - and it doesn't represent their concerns because not enough MDs are in it.

Wouldn't it make more sense if more people joined the AMA in order to make it represent their concerns? The AMA is among the most powerful lobbying groups in the country...

Yes I plan to join the AMA.

Actually, it doesn't represent doctors' view because the people in charge don't speak for the majority. You know the kids over in Pre-Allo who talk about wanting to work for less money and for the greater good, no matter what? Though only a very small percentage of people actually stick with that view beyond the first couple days of med school, some of the ones who did are now running the AMA, and it's going to be a long time before they're deposed.

As for the med student section of the AMA, to be kind, it is a complete joke and accomplishes exactly nothing. It's like a daycare for med students who want to feel important and inflate their own egos. During last summer's national conference, the rep from the "real" AMA made it very clear that the med students were an insignificant part of the action.

 

[AlexMorph]

Actually, it doesn't represent doctors' view because the people in charge don't speak for the majority. You know the kids over in Pre-Allo who talk about wanting to work for less money and for the greater good, no matter what? Though only a very small percentage of people actually stick with that view beyond the first couple days of med school, some of the ones who did are now running the AMA, and it's going to be a long time before they're deposed.

As for the med student section of the AMA, to be kind, it is a complete joke and accomplishes exactly nothing. It's like a daycare for med students who want to feel important and inflate their own egos. During last summer's national conference, the rep from the "real" AMA made it very clear that the med students were an insignificant part of the action.

On a sidenote, compared to the nutbags part of AMSA, the student AMA is actually pretty mild in terms of its views. Or maybe it's dependent upon the school you attend...which is more crazy

 

[Raryn]

OMG!!! are you kidding me??? ofcourse!

The AMA wants 60 bucks or so for an annual membership fee... how could you turn that down??? they're gonna give you some free netters flashcards!!! beat that!!! (they're 25 bucks on amazon)

I'm gonna be a DOCTOR!!! the AMA = "doctoring" = me. As soon as I got my acceptance, I joined as many medical student and medical organizations as I could! You know that crap that falls out everytime you open one of them AAFP magazines? I filled out every single one of them too!

And that's not even half the story!! I am now part of the A.... M.... A..... !!! "M" stands for MEDICAL!!!

oh yeah baby!

Our AMA-MSS was $45ish for a 4-year membership that included the netter cards, a year JAMA subscription, and a variety of discounts on other stuff.

I'm relatively involved with the student group and the state medical society (I was a delegate to the state house of delegates) and will go to the national conference in Chicago this summer (just to watch, our student group president is our voting delegate.) While the amount of say the student section has at the national level isn't very large, you can be pretty damn influential on the state level depending on where you are. The two medical schools in Wisconsin provided about a third of the full voting delegates to the HoD meeting last month.

As for whether I'll join the AMA as a resident/physician, I'm not sure. I'm definitely going to join my specialty society (like the majority of physicians), but I can see how being involved in policymaking for medicine as a whole will be important as well. At the very least, I could see myself being involved with the state medical society wherever I end up after graduation.

On a sidenote, compared to the nutbags part of AMSA, the student AMA is actually pretty mild in terms of its views. Or maybe it's dependent upon the school you attend...which is more crazy

At our school AMSA isn't the least bit politically active, but its true that one of the main reasons the (national) group was started because they felt that the AMA was too conservative. (especially with regards to a few issues such as civil rights and Vietnam) This has definitely changed since the 1960s, with the AMA leadership now holding views that are more liberal than a large portion of physicians (though probably still more conservative than a large number of students.) On the national level though, AMSA is still (by far) the more liberal one even if the AMA has gone more towards the center.

 

[MilkmanAl]

On a sidenote, compared to the nutbags part of AMSA, the student AMA is actually pretty mild in terms of its views. Or maybe it's dependent upon the school you attend...which is more crazy

Yep, I'd agree. It seems that the lunatic fringe gets trimmed even more when the prospect of real responsibility comes into play, so the AMA doesn't end up being quite as radical a supporter of making all physician work pro bono as it could be.

 

[weightyheart]

This is utterly preposterous.

Would you join the republican or democrat party so that you can change the views of its members? Or would you attend a church and then try to tell their members that there is no god?

And if you did join such a group, would the leaders in these organizations allow you a position to influence its members against what they believe?

No, I am not going to join an organization, support them, give them money, and let them say they represent one more physician, if I do not agree with their policies.

Not an actual med student until August - but I saw this thread and had to respond.

So... people aren't interested in joining the AMA because the AMA doesn't represent their concerns - and it doesn't represent their concerns because not enough MDs are in it.

Wouldn't it make more sense if more people joined the AMA in order to make it represent their concerns? The AMA is among the most powerful lobbying groups in the country...

Yes I plan to join the AMA.

 

[GoLytely]

As has already been alluded to here, the AMA has actually made a habit of doing the OPPOSITE of what's good for physicians, instead advocating for "the welfare of all patients." Let's take a brief look at their recent activity - supporting a bill to inevitably ration care, decrease physician reimbursements, restrict autonomy, and aid the argument for more nurse practitioners (whose outrageous recent activity they've done NOTHING to hamper).

What we need is an organization that HASN'T been brainwashed by altruist propaganda and Nancy Pelosi. Unfortunately, this would not be an organization of physicians, since they've no idea how to stick up for their own rights and/or freedom to earn a living. What we need is to pay a large organization of lawyers to stick up for us, since they're not wimps.

Since the falloff of the AMA, there are now officially ZERO influential organizations fighting for our well-being.

 

[deleted77919]

…

 

[Dr Oops]

the AMA is about as useful as a 90 yr old mans junk. The problem is every thinks that they represent physicians. Physicians need a real lobbying organization to take over and quickly.

 

[Tutmos]

Hrmmm starting school in August, non-traditional, not a prayer of joining AMA.

 

[phospho]

It's like a daycare for med students who want to feel important and inflate their own egos.

haha, so true...

 

[AlexMorph]

Hrmmm starting school in August, non-traditional, not a prayer of joining AMA.

Depending on how well your chapter is run, there can be some delicious food. The AMA at my school provided some good food. AMSA...not so much. Free lunches can be hugely convincing.

 

[kdburton]

As has already been alluded to here, the AMA has actually made a habit of doing the OPPOSITE of what's good for physicians, instead advocating for "the welfare of all patients." Let's take a brief look at their recent activity - supporting a bill to inevitably ration care, decrease physician reimbursements, restrict autonomy, and aid the argument for more nurse practitioners (whose outrageous recent activity they've done NOTHING to hamper).

What we need is an organization that HASN'T been brainwashed by altruist propaganda and Nancy Pelosi. Unfortunately, this would not be an organization of physicians, since they've no idea how to stick up for their own rights and/or freedom to earn a living. What we need is to pay a large organization of lawyers to stick up for us, since they're not wimps.

Since the falloff of the AMA, there are now officially ZERO influential organizations fighting for our well-being.

Agree. The sooner we all realize that medicine is just narcissism hiding behind a veil of altruism, the sooner we will be able to use our work ethic and intelligence to grow a spine and advocate for things that lead to an early retirement on a nice beach somewhere 😉 God I hate Nancy Pelosi

 

[AlexMorph]

Agree. The sooner we all realize that medicine is just narcissism hiding behind a veil of altruism, the sooner we will be able to use our work ethic and intelligence to grow a spine and advocate for things that lead to an early retirement on a nice beach somewhere 😉 God I hate Nancy Pelosi

No veil here. Just narcissism!

 

[Forthegood]

I think it is important for doctors to have a unified, national voice.

Good luck with that.

Actually, it doesn't represent doctors' view because the people in charge don't speak for the majority. You know the kids over in Pre-Allo who talk about wanting to work for less money and for the greater good, no matter what? Though only a very small percentage of people actually stick with that view beyond the first couple days of med school, some of the ones who did are now running the AMA, and it's going to be a long time before they're deposed.

As for the med student section of the AMA, to be kind, it is a complete joke and accomplishes exactly nothing. It's like a daycare for med students who want to feel important and inflate their own egos. During last summer's national conference, the rep from the "real" AMA made it very clear that the med students were an insignificant part of the action.

I am glad I did not go to your medical school. No wonder suicide rates are so high.

Student organizations are always a joke, just like every organization. We don't have the moolah yet to be important.

Agree. The sooner we all realize that medicine is just narcissism hiding behind a veil of altruism, the sooner we will be able to use our work ethic and intelligence to grow a spine and advocate for things that lead to an early retirement on a nice beach somewhere 😉 God I hate Nancy Pelosi

I just threw up a bit in my mouth. Oh god, here it comes again...

 

[kdburton]

Lets start a new organization: ANA (American Narcissist Association)

We partner up with our narcissist lawyer counterparts to - halt, and even reverse, the encroachment of midlevels on medical practice; rally everyone to refuse medicare patients so that the government is forced to redistribute our income (you know... the 40% of our taxes they took) back to us; TORT REFORM!

 

[MilkmanAl]

I am glad I did not go to your medical school. No wonder suicide rates are so high.

🙄 You can still want to help people and be a good doctor without undermining your own earning potential and quality of life, you know.

 

[AlexMorph]

Lets start a new organization: ANA (American Narcissist Association)

We partner up with our narcissist lawyer counterparts to - halt, and even reverse, the encroachment of midlevels on medical practice; rally everyone to refuse medicare patients so that the government is forced to redistribute our income (you know... the 40% of our taxes they took) back to us; TORT REFORM!

If you add the provision that every doc gets to pick from either a BMW 7 Series or a Mercedes Benz S Class, I'm down.

 

[kdburton]

If you add the provision that every doc gets to pick from either a BMW 7 Series or a Mercedes Benz S Class, I'm down.

Done and done!

 

[red10]

my bf's plastic surgeon father joined AMA because his insurance thinks it's a good thing and will lower his premium if he's a member for w/e reason. He hates the AMA and used all the JAMAs to balance wobbly furniture, line the bunny's cage, etc. lol

 

[Rabbit Hole]

You people need to put your money where your mouth is and support political action committees that represent your interests. Your disillusionement will lead to apathy and this is exactly what opposing parties bank on to push their own agendas. While you sit there and yell at the news on the tv screen huffing and puffing about how unfair **** is.. the opposition is sitting comfortably in positions of power because they were able to get one over you.

Take a look at this:

PAC Contributions to Federal Candidates 2008 Election Cycle
PAC Contributions to Federal Candidates 2010 Election Cycle

Draw your own conclusions and look into the PAC that best represents your interests. Believe it or not, the AMA is doing their best with what they can. They've put out all the resources and attempt to reach out but if you don't give them any feedback what the hell do you expect? For those of you who have been following the DNP debacle, the only substantial resistance I have seen came from the AMA - by publishing their scope of practice series on nurse practitioners and now they are engaging in a truth in advertising campaign so that nurses can't go around pretending to have the same qualifications as physicians.

AMA Political Action Committee

 

[themule]

Link

Written by Scott Becker, JD, CPA | April 07, 2010

The American Medical Association has been in existence for 162 years now, making it the oldest trade association in the nation, but this organization doesn't have a clue anymore as to what a trade association is about.

A trade association promotes its members' best interests. From time to time, it can embrace higher causes, even a cause such as health reform. But if it strays too far from its core mission of delivering benefits for members, it ceases to be a trade association and becomes something else — maybe an officious advisory group, as when the AMA declared in 2008 climate change was real.

Last year, the AMA gave its support to a fledgling health reform process whose ultimate success was very much in doubt at the time. In return for that support, the AMA wanted at minimum two basic things: federal tort reform and a permanent fix of Congress' noxious sustainable growth rate. The SGR, promulgated in 1997, has been producing ever-higher proposed cuts in Medicare physician reimbursement, which constantly have to be patched but are never removed.

Now health reform has become law, and what does the AMA have to show for its early support? No SGR-fix, no tort reform and a number of new payment problems created by the new law. Here are just four examples.

* a powerful new advisory board that can lower physician fees with little Congressional oversight.
* an estimated 15 million previously uninsured people who will be covered at very low-paying Medicaid rates.
* the prospect of intra-professional conflict as Medicare reimbursements for some areas may be raised and, under the zero-sum game of Medicare spending, physician reimbursements will probably fall.
* the demise of physician-owned hospitals. No new facilities can be built after this year and existing facilities cannot expand upon the date of enactment.


That adds up to no wins and several losses for physicians, leaving Paul DeHaan, MD, an orthopedic surgeon and AMA member in McHenry, Ill., feeling frustrated. In the health reform process, "there are huge concerns that many critical items we've been asking for were ignored," Dr. DeHaan told the Chicago Tribune. "I believe they [the AMA] lost much support and confidence from a large faction of members, and that will hurt them in recruitment and retention."

Who got the better of whom?
AMA President J. James Rohack, MD, has repeatedly said the AMA's early support of the health reform bills gave it a front-row seat at the bargaining table, where it would be able to finesse more physician-friendly provisions into the final law. Last August he characterized an early version of the House health reform bill as "a starting point for the health reform debate, and the AMA is committed to staying engaged to improve the final legislation."

But as it turned out, the chief benefit of AMA involvement in the process was to make it easier for President Obama to sell the bill to Congress and the nation. Urging the House to pass the reform bill in November, Mr. Obama noted that the doctors of the AMA were behind it, and "they would not be supporting it if they really believed it would lead to government bureaucrats making decisions that are best left to doctors."

Actually, the President needed the AMA more than the AMA needed him, according to Howard Smith, MD, a Washington, D.C., obstetrician-gynecologist. "Obama needed to get all the major actors on board to have any hope for it to pass," Dr. Smith wrote last year in the blog, DC Examiner. "Knowing this, it stood to reason that it would be more to the advantage of the AMA to hold its support off until it could get the best deal possible."

As the AMA became more expendable in moving the bill forward, its influence over the process waned. The fate of the SGR-fix is a good example. "The flawed Medicare payment formula must be fixed," Dr. Rohack told MedPage Today in the summer, when things still looked pretty promising for this issue. The House passed an SGR-fix in its first version of health reform, but then things went downhill. The SGR-fix has a huge price tag — $210 billion to $230 billion over 10 years. That's the amount on paper, at least. In reality, Congress has always in the past staved off the cuts and the money is never realized. In the strange world of Capitol Hill, though, this fictional amount is real money — so real that it threatened to squeeze out the money Congress wanted to spend on expanding coverage to millions of uninsured people, while delivering net savings over 10 years. After the short-lived victory in the House, the Senate threw the SGR-fix out of its reform bill, introduced it as a separate measure and voted it down.

That was the end of the fee fix as part of health reform, but Congress was still assuring the AMA until the end that the SGR-fix had a chance, and the AMA believed them. As recently as last month, just before the final health reform vote, Dr. Rohack was still promising in a conference call to reporters he'd hold Congress' "feet to the fire" and make it pass a permanent fee-fix. But it was too late. "It becomes extremely difficult to do a fix now that health reform has passed with such a big price tag," Julius Hobson, the AMA's former chief lobbyist, told Chicago Business a few days after the final vote.

Why the AMA failed to have influence on health reform
Why, after being so tough on President Clinton's health reform proposal in the early 1990s, did the AMA roll over so easily for President Obama and the Congressional Democrats? Many personally blame Dr. Rohack. This cowboy-booted cardiologist from Texas entered the AMA's one-year presidency just when health reform negotiations heated up and he's pretty much been front-and-center ever since. But even if Dr. Rohack shares some of the blame, the AMA's mistakes run deeper than one man who took office last June and will be gone from it this coming June.

One mistake was the organization's highly nuanced position on health reform, which nobody but the AMA got. The organization frequently said while it supported the proposed health reforms, it did not endorse them. What? "'Endorse' means you think it's perfect and love it the way it is; 'support' means there is enough there to keep it moving while realizing there are things that need to be changed," an AMA delegate explained to Psychiatric News. A good explanation, perhaps, but the headline always was the AMA supports health reform. In a December letter on the Senate's reform bill to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the AMA said it "firmly supports critical aspects of the bill" but "there is still work to be done." What kind of negotiation tactic "firmly" supports a plan — even parts of a plan — and still demands changes? Do you even listen to the demands of a negotiating partner who has already agreed to the contract?

The AMA's biggest mistake, however, was getting so smitten with the prospect of health reform that pocketbook interests for members were put in the trunk. Even before the reform debate, "the AMA was traditionally cautious about advocating the interests of doctors because it feared that advocacy could be misperceived by the public as partisanship," Dr. Smith explained in his blog. This time around, AMA officials also appeared to have no appetite any more for always having to nix ambitious, well-meaning social programs in favor of pocketbook issues. Some delegates at the AMA's December meeting praised the organization's affirmative stance on health reform and criticized "the AMA's reputation over the years as a nay-sayer — voting against Medicare in 1965 and the Clinton health care reform proposal in the 1990s," the Psychiatric News reported.

Though Dr. Rohack and the rest of the AMA board set AMA policy through most of the health reform debate, the House of Delegates, the ultimate authority in the AMA, had a chance to redirect it at an interim meeting in Houston last December. Three former AMA presidents and 10 state and specialty societies came in open revolt against the board's stance, but delegates firmly rejected a motion to rescind AMA support of health reform by a vote of 315-199. (However, they did pass several resolutions condemning parts of the bill, such as the advisory board.)

The Houston vote was a validation for Dr. Rohack, giving the beleaguered board an endorsement from the entire "House of Medicine." "Our policy is created through our House of Delegates," he told Analyst Wire afterwards. "Our House of Delegates represents every state medical association, over 170 specialty societies, medical students, residents, faculty of medical students, faculty of medical schools. So our policy is created by the profession."

AMA policy was endorsed by the profession. The delegates might have made the endorsement, however, because they were handed a fait accompli with little choice but to accept it. Sure, they could have yanked the AMA board from its chosen path, but health reform already seemed to be well into its last lap (that is, until Scott Brown (R-Mass.) won the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts and put off final passage for a couple of months).

While the House of Delegates true stance on health reforms seems a little unclear, polls of physicians are even hazier. A National Public Radio poll in September found that nearly three-quarters of physicians favored a public option for health insurance, but another poll the same month by Investors Business Daily found 65 percent of doctors opposed government expansion of healthcare.

No longer a membership-driven organization
The House of Delegates may still represent physicians to some degree, but the AMA definitely does not. AMA membership reportedly reached a peak of 70 percent of physicians in 1962 and now is generally pegged at about 17-20 percent of all doctors. (The number is fuzzy because members include medical students and retired physicians, who have relatively high membership rates because they pay discounted dues.)

While plummeting membership would cripple most organizations, the AMA makes up for lost dues income by relying increasingly on other income. Product endorsements have been out ever since the 1997 Sunbeam scandal, but publications like CPT coding manuals have filled in the gap. In 2008, dues made up only 16 percent of AMA revenues, or $43.9 million, while books & products made up $69.9 million in revenues, database products made up $47.6 million and publications, $64.6 million, according to the most recent statistics in the AMA's 2008 annual report.

Other trade organizations have to meet the needs of dues-paying members, but the AMA is in its own, strange orbit. While it is still regarded, for now, as a major force in national policymaking, whether it can remain so is an open question. It is no longer the tough-minded trade group that frequently went to the mat on payment issues with federal policymakers. Its membership is broad and too ill-defined to direct policy. And, in the health reform debate, at least, its leadership seems to lack the most basic negotiating skills.

"The AMA, when first established, represented the views of the doctors in the 'trenches,' but now they have capitulated to our government and are not interested in the needs of practicing physicians," wrote Harold Fields, MD, in a comment on the HCP Live Network last July. "The AMA is only interested in self-advancement and maintaining its position."

 

[jl lin]

This is utterly preposterous.

Would you join the republican or democrat party so that you can change the views of its members? Or would you attend a church and then try to tell their members that there is no god?

And if you did join such a group, would the leaders in these organizations allow you a position to influence its members against what they believe?

No, I am not going to join an organization, support them, give them money, and let them say they represent one more physician, if I do not agree with their policies.

Precisely.

 

[jl lin]

🙄 You can still want to help people and be a good doctor without undermining your own earning potential and quality of life, you know.

This gets a bit tougher though if you go into FM, and you aren't under-represented for scholarships and such. I am sorry, but this is a huge issue--tuition for med school and that large repay w/ not-so-fabulous compensation. I really wish this was not the issue it is; but there you go.

 

[kdburton]

This gets a bit tougher though if you go into FM, and you aren't under-represented for scholarships and such. I am sorry, but this is a huge issue--tuition for med school and that large repay w/ not-so-fabulous compensation. I really wish this was not the issue it is; but there you go.

Its not just an issue with FM

 

[jl lin]

Its not just an issue with FM

Aren't they having the biggest trouble with compensation--well as well as general peds?

 

[Tubed]

Link

Wow. Like others, I currently have no intention of monetarily supporting the AMA but I've been on the fence about accepting their offer of free membership for intern year. This makes that decision A LOT easier.

 

[phospho]

Aren't they having the biggest trouble with compensation--well as well as general peds?

why peds?

 

[Ashers]

My program pays for our membership. I've written a quick draft of a letter that I need to send to my program because I don't want to be a member of the AMA. It does not represent what I believe. I would rather have the membership fees that are paid for me go to my specialty membership.

I was so glad to be rid of the AMA after med school which I joined for the Stedman's dictionary. At least I'm now free of AMSA which I joined for the Netter.

 

[caliprincess]

There is never going to be one organization that will encompass all of your ideals as a person or a physician. If you don't like what something stands for, then there is no need to join. No one is twisting your arm to become a member of any organization (AMA, AMSA, AAP, ACOG, AFP, PNHP, etc...) especially if you feel your values will not be adequately represented.

That said, the AMA is what you make of it. I am an active member and I hold various positions in my region and within my state medical society. I did not agree with the AMA's stance on healthare reform, and I was pretty vocal about it. Yet, I did not completely throw the organization aside in my agenda because there are other issues that they advocate for in which I strongly believe in. I must say though, it does provide an unparalleled networking opportunity, especially in state level politics (well I can't speak for other states, but it definitely does in NJ). At the end of the day, I am certainly getting more out of my $60 membership fee than I anticipated. I have made some amazing contacts and it has opened several doors for me, so for that I am thankful.

I think it is important for you to come to your own conclusions about any organization that solicits your membership. Join because it is right for YOU, not your classmates, not your professors, not your mom, but for you. That is all.

 

[justdoit31]

Depending on how well your chapter is run, there can be some delicious food. The AMA at my school provided some good food. AMSA...not so much. Free lunches can be hugely convincing.

Every organization/club at my school has a budget and all offer free meals at meetings- AMA wasn't any better than the others in terms of selection but it was more expensive (most clubs are usually $10-15 per year and included 4-6 free meals due to school alotted budgets)

Also, I joined the AMA as a naive MSI- I have a 4 year membership and I am still debating get out of my membership- they don't support anything I do and lobby for interests against mine- unless there are serious changes they won't get more of my money. However the TMA (texas medical association) has supported my interests so I will continue that one.

 

[Gabby]

Wow, I can't believe how many times some semblance of the phrase "they don't represent what I believe in" was uttered in this thread. You guys are adults, right? Did you get out there and fight for what you believe? Do you think the AMA is just going to coddle you and ask what you want them to do while they buy you ice cream and stroke your hair?

I, for one, felt stronly about a few issues so I ran to be a delegate from my school. I won. This summer, I'll be in Chicago, writing resolutions, giving testimony, and VOTING for what I want as a medical student at the annual meeting, instead of whining on SDN about how the AMA doesn't represent me.

 

[caliprincess]

Wow, I can't believe how many times some semblance of the phrase "they don't represent what I believe in" was uttered in this thread. You guys are adults, right? Did you get out there and fight for what you believe? Do you think the AMA is just going to coddle you and ask what you want them to do while they buy you ice cream and stroke your hair?

I, for one, felt stronly about a few issues so I ran to be a delegate from my school. I won. This summer, I'll be in Chicago, writing resolutions, giving testimony, and VOTING for what I want as a medical student at the annual meeting, instead of whining on SDN about how the AMA doesn't represent me.

Here here! 👍👍 See ya in Chicago ;-)

 

[7starmantis]

Wow, I can't believe how many times some semblance of the phrase "they don't represent what I believe in" was uttered in this thread. You guys are adults, right? Did you get out there and fight for what you believe? Do you think the AMA is just going to coddle you and ask what you want them to do while they buy you ice cream and stroke your hair?

I, for one, felt stronly about a few issues so I ran to be a delegate from my school. I won. This summer, I'll be in Chicago, writing resolutions, giving testimony, and VOTING for what I want as a medical student at the annual meeting, instead of whining on SDN about how the AMA doesn't represent me.

I guess this explains all those conservative republicans heading up ACORN and the liberal dems being part of the tea parties.

Just because someone doesn't feel like joining a group that doesn't represent them doesn't mean, or has no bearing on their maturity. I wouldn't join a group that doesn't represent me (like the AMA, but kudos to justdoit, I'll join TMA as well). By this logic emergency medicine physicians should be joining OB/GYN groups trying to vote them into supporting ER issues.

Not every med student or physician has the time, inclination, or desire to run for office or become deeply involved in decision making of interest groups. Its ok to join a group simply to support them and their support of your ideals.

 

[Raryn]

I guess this explains all those conservative republicans heading up ACORN and the liberal dems being part of the tea parties.

Just because someone doesn't feel like joining a group that doesn't represent them doesn't mean, or has no bearing on their maturity. I wouldn't join a group that doesn't represent me (like the AMA, but kudos to justdoit, I'll join TMA as well). By this logic emergency medicine physicians should be joining OB/GYN groups trying to vote them into supporting ER issues.

Not every med student or physician has the time, inclination, or desire to run for office or become deeply involved in decision making of interest groups. Its ok to join a group simply to support them and their support of your ideals.

Except that if you don't want to join the Republican party, you can always join the Democrat party. There is no alternative to the AMA for a group representing all physicians. There are other groups for different social classes of physicians (AMWA, NMA, etc) and for different specialties (ACP, AAP, ACEP, ACS, etc) but there is no other group representing physicians as a whole.

Like it or not, to the lay public (& to the politicians) the AMA (especially the house of delegates) represents the will of the house of medicine. Unlike something like one of the major political parties, its not that hard to get involved with the AMA, and if you feel strongly about any issues, nothing is stopping you from having them brought up. At the very least, get involved with your state medical society and vote on issues that you feel should be brought up at the national level.

The medical societies don't have as much teeth as the bar associations, but I don't see anyone bringing forth any alternatives, so if you feel strongly, get involved and try and get them to build those teeth.

 

[7starmantis]

Except that if you don't want to join the Republican party, you can always join the Democrat party. There is no alternative to the AMA for a group representing all physicians. There are other groups for different social classes of physicians (AMWA, NMA, etc) and for different specialties (ACP, AAP, ACEP, ACS, etc) but there is no other group representing physicians as a whole.

Like it or not, to the lay public (& to the politicians) the AMA (especially the house of delegates) represents the will of the house of medicine. Unlike something like one of the major political parties, its not that hard to get involved with the AMA, and if you feel strongly about any issues, nothing is stopping you from having them brought up. At the very least, get involved with your state medical society and vote on issues that you feel should be brought up at the national level.

The medical societies don't have as much teeth as the bar associations, but I don't see anyone bringing forth any alternatives, so if you feel strongly, get involved and try and get them to build those teeth.

That was sort of my point, not everyone feels strongly about all the issues. So gabby's post getting on to people for not joining the AMA because they dont represent them was overstated a bit. Not everyone wants to get that involved in a group like the AMA.

That being said:
1.) If people really feel that strongly they can start another medical association.
2.) I dont think politicians see the AMA as the "will of the house of medicine" anymore than we do.
3.) I think laypersons are becoming more educated and aware of these things as well.
4.) Just because lay people see it one way doesn't mean we have to follow their perceptions, education is an option.
5.) I think specialty groups are just as powerful lobbyist in todays world as the AMA, and more specific at that.

Just my few cents.

 

[Gabby]

So gabby's post getting on to people for not joining the AMA because they dont represent them was overstated a bit.

Actually, it wasn't. My point was and still is: if you don't want to join the AMA, no problem. BUT don't expect not to be called on the hypocrisy of not joining and choosing to complain here on SDN instead.

The AMA is not an exclusive group that will freeze you out if you want to make changes. You can actually show up and lobby for whatever it is you want. You can write resolutions. You can give testimony. You can vote. If you do that and nothing changes, bitch away. But if you refuse to do all those things and insist on whining instead without putting in minimal effort to let people know what it is you want to happen, it looks (a) lazy, (b) immature, (c) hypocritical.

 

[7starmantis]

it looks (a) lazy, (b) immature, (c) hypocritical.

OH the venom! 🙄

Calm down. People are answering a question about would they join and giving reasons why they would not join. Your calling their answer and reason "bitching" and then attributing (a) lazy, (b) immature, (c) hypocritical characteristics to them.

People are simply answering a question, no need to get rowdy. However, changing the face of the AMA is a much harder task than you are letting on. Plus no one is under any obligation to change the AMA, they can join or not join, its up to them. To call those who do not join names isn't getting anywhere. If anything it might lead some further away from membership. I know I would have no desire to be a part of an association with people who are going to call me names for my thoughts and action.

Just saying.

 

[Gabby]

OH the venom! 🙄

Calm down. People are answering a question about would they join and giving reasons why they would not join. Your calling their answer and reason "bitching" and then attributing (a) lazy, (b) immature, (c) hypocritical characteristics to them.

People are simply answering a question, no need to get rowdy. However, changing the face of the AMA is a much harder task than you are letting on. Plus no one is under any obligation to change the AMA, they can join or not join, its up to them. To call those who do not join names isn't getting anywhere. If anything it might lead some further away from membership. I know I would have no desire to be a part of an association with people who are going to call me names for my thoughts and action.

Just saying.

Hey, if you don't want to join or don't have interest in making things better, that's all you. But don't expect not to be called on it when you complain. I think of it the same way I do elections -- you didn't vote? Don't bitch. Simple as that.

 

[weightyheart]

Abstaining from voting is a valid choice that is often done because you feel there is no candidate who advocates for your most important beliefs. In many cases - and some may consider the past few presidential elections as good examples - voters are forced to choose the lesser evil or abstain from voting altogether. These citizens may feel that voting provides only an illusion of choice. So this isn't such a good example for your argument.

Actually, without a viable opposing organization or voice, the AMA doesn't have to acknowledge that there may be differing viewpoints among physicians. And medical students (I personally can't speak for physicians) aren't even given an "illusion of choice". The only real choice for medical students is to support the AMA or remain silent.

My understanding of the situation is that you are a part of the AMA, you believe in their goals, and you are biased. I respect your position. But what you are now saying is, join the AMA or stop the complaining and saying why we do not like the AMA. So these are our only two choices you are giving us? You want us to stop voicing our opinions and criticizing the AMA? Are we now living in a fascist regime with no freedom to do so?

Hey, if you don't want to join or don't have interest in making things better, that's all you. But don't expect not to be called on it when you complain. I think of it the same way I do elections -- you didn't vote? Don't bitch. Simple as that.

 

[7starmantis]

Hey, if you don't want to join or don't have interest in making things better, that's all you. But don't expect not to be called on it when you complain. I think of it the same way I do elections -- you didn't vote? Don't bitch. Simple as that.

I didn't complain, I gave a reason for not joining the AMA. So "calling me" on what exactly? You can't claim everyone who doesn't join the AMA is "bitching" and say they are all hypocrites and should be expected to be "called out". There is nothing to be "called out" about here, just me presenting my views, even if you dont like them.

Simple as that.

 

[Gabby]

My understanding of the situation is that you are a part of the AMA, you believe in their goals, and you are biased.

I don't think you do understand the situation based on this post. I didn't join the AMA and run to be a delegate because I agreed with their position. I did it because I DISagreed. Do I agree with their goals? Well, considering their goals involve advocating for physicians, yeah, that's a fair assessment. How they go about it, I don't agree with, which is why I'm putting myself out there to make my voice heard.

But what you are now saying is, join the AMA or stop the complaining and saying why we do not like the AMA.

Nope, I never once told people they weren't allowed to complain. I just said that they'll be called on it. All this whining about how the AMA doesn't look out for their best interest, wah, wah, wah, is immature, frankly, and I'll continue to say so.

So these are our only two choices you are giving us? You want us to stop voicing our opinions and criticizing the AMA? Are we now living in a fascist regime with no freedom to do so?

Read above.

 

[7starmantis]