plans for 8 new schools- eventually

[MeAgain]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I don't know when, it could take years, but here is the article. I also posted it in the Dental section to see the differing opinions.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/09/23/dentalcare.medicaid/index.html?iref=24hours

 

[mamelons]

I don't know when, it could take years, but here is the article. I also posted it in the Dental section to see the differing opinions.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/09/23/dentalcare.medicaid/index.html?iref=24hours

Although I sympathize with the family who lost their child because of a tooth infection, I do not agree with how these articles always make it appear as though the healthcare system failed these individuals who "cannot" find dental care. Healthcare is not a right, it is a privilege. This does not mean I am not opposed to serving those without access to care -- many, many dentists provide pro bono care at various times throughout the year, and I intend to do just that when I am a practicing dentist. I just don't agree with how the media portrays dentists (and physicians) as the "bad guy" -- just read some of the New York Times articles posted in the past year or so.

Opening more schools may or may not be the solution -- the article says that people cannot find dentists "willing" to provide care. If this is the case, then opening more schools could potentially exacerbate the problem -- more graduating dentists who may not be "willing" to provide care.

Access to care is an issue -- I think a better way to alleviate this problem would be to add a 5th year of "dental school" where every dentist is required to go to an underserved area during their last year of "education" and provide care -- students will still graduate after 4 years, but it would be contracted out for each person to go to a underserved area on a first-come first serve basis. In addition to providing care for underserved populations, you would also be getting more experience, enhancing your skills, and becoming more confident and independent. This would not be the same thing as an AEGD -- you would have to do that following your 5th year (if desired). If the ADA implemented something of this nature, the access to care issue would be much better with new dentists in their 5th year every year -- and you could potentially do this with specialties as well -- your last year of specialty training is spent going to underserved areas providing pedo, endo, oms, etc. Now doing this in addition to opening up new schools would be a great start to finding a solution to the problem. Just my opinion though.

 

[Andrea368]

Healthcare is not a right, it is a privilege.

It is there that I sorely disagree with you. Even if my income and standard of living will one day suffer a fraction, I hope there comes a day when not being able to afford a dentist isn't an issue for preventative care. Corny? Yes, but to be in that situation...

I understand what you are trying to say though.

 

[btk2333]

I'm with you Andrea, health care is a right, but I think mamelon may be on to something

 

[hoss19]

I don't know when, it could take years, but here is the article. I also posted it in the Dental section to see the differing opinions.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/09/23/dentalcare.medicaid/index.html?iref=24hours

i live in dc and when this story about the child dying from an abcess ran in the post it created quite a buzz in the dental community. the story was titled For Want of a Dentist and can be found here if you did not see this

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022702116.html

 

[hoss19]

......Access to care is an issue -- I think a better way to alleviate this problem would be to add a 5th year of "dental school" where every dentist is required to go to an underserved area during their last year of "education" and provide care -- students will still graduate after 4 years, but it would be contracted out for each person to go to a underserved area on a first-come first serve basis. In addition to providing care for underserved populations, you would also be getting more experience, enhancing your skills, and becoming more confident and independent. This would not be the same thing as an AEGD -- you would have to do that following your 5th year (if desired). If the ADA implemented something of this nature, the access to care issue would be much better with new dentists in their 5th year every year -- and you could potentially do this with specialties as well -- your last year of specialty training is spent going to underserved areas providing pedo, endo, oms, etc. Now doing this in addition to opening up new schools would be a great start to finding a solution to the problem. Just my opinion though.

while this is an excellent idea on paper (and gets you points for creative thinking!), i think the likelihood of this happening is slim to none and slim just left town. however, offering students a government-funded tuition break for a year of service (say 1 year and the govt kicks back two years of tuition + a stipend during the year of service) might be more a more likely scenario. If 5-10% of graduates signed on to this option, there just might be enough of a supply to put a dent (no pun intended) in the problems noted in the articles.

I think there are a TON of graduating dental students who are eager to help in underserved areas but with loans and the pressure to start in practice, they are unlikely to follow their hearts.

I am really passionate about helping out in medically underserved areas and those w/o access to healthcare. i would love to focus on providing service to people in the developing world too. however i am fearful that 4 years of tuition + living expenses is a significant amount of debt to deal with. when the time comes i will probably opt to start in a practice to begin to put some of that debt to bed if no other options are available to me.

 

[klutzy1987]

Opening new schools does not solve anything, dentists still do not want to make less money for the sdame work, so dentisst will still not accept medicaid.

 

[Physics Guy1421]

while this is an excellent idea on paper (and gets you points for creative thinking!), i think the likelihood of this happening is slim to none and slim just left town. however, offering students a government-funded tuition break for a year of service (say 1 year and the govt kicks back two years of tuition + a stipend during the year of service) might be more a more likely scenario. If 5-10% of graduates signed on to this option, there just might be enough of a supply to put a dent (no pun intended) in the problems noted in the articles.

I think there are a TON of graduating dental students who are eager to help in underserved areas but with loans and the pressure to start in practice, they are unlikely to follow their hearts.

I am really passionate about helping out in medically underserved areas and those w/o access to healthcare. i would love to focus on providing service to people in the developing world too. however i am fearful that 4 years of tuition + living expenses is a significant amount of debt to deal with. when the time comes i will probably opt to start in a practice to begin to put some of that debt to bed if no other options are available to me.

I think this would be an excellent idea! The 5th year of dental school is a good idea as well but 4 years of dental school alone is very costly. You would certainly have to pay for a 5th year and I think dental students who incurred a 5th year of dental tuition would be less likely to take Medicaid patients, once in practice, due to the increased debt.

I share the same sentiment about wishing to serve the medically under-served, especially after volunteering at a GPR that only treats Medicaid patients, but the harsh reality is that after 4 years of dental school, in addition to tuition costs from undergrad, I'll be anywhere from 3k-5k in debt. As you noted, once I finish dental school and my residency and that debt is staring me in the face, I'll likely feel the need to alleviate some of it by going into private practice. In that case, only latter on when I've managed to get the debt under control would I be able to volunteer and to serve the poor; I'd rather have the option to do it throughout my career.

 

[Chesnok]

Opening new schools does not solve anything, dentists still do not want to make less money for the sdame work, so dentisst will still not accept medicaid.

So what is Medicaid for, just to have it and not getting dental care; it doesn't make sense for me thou

 

[MeAgain]

Opening new schools does not solve anything, dentists still do not want to make less money for the sdame work, so dentisst will still not accept medicaid.

They want dentists to be forced to take medicaid patients by flooding new dentists into the profession. Basic supply and demand. The private paying patient and dentist ratio would change and one would have to take on medicaid to keep up.

More dentists = fewer patients per dentist= lower pay for dentists

 

[mamelons]

They want dentists to be forced to take medicaid patients by flooding new dentists into the profession. Basic supply and demand. The private paying patient and dentist ratio would change and one would have to take on medicaid to keep up.

More dentists = fewer patients per dentist= lower pay for dentists

Taking Medicaid will in no way help dentists keep up. The reimbursements are almost nothing, and many times these patients don't show up.

 

[MeAgain]

Yes, medicaid does not reimburse sufficiently, but I am sure a lot of dentists would be willing to take these patients over an empty schedule.

 

[Andrea368]

while this is an excellent idea on paper (and gets you points for creative thinking!), i think the likelihood of this happening is slim to none and slim just left town. however, offering students a government-funded tuition break for a year of service (say 1 year and the govt kicks back two years of tuition + a stipend during the year of service) might be more a more likely scenario. If 5-10% of graduates signed on to this option, there just might be enough of a supply to put a dent (no pun intended) in the problems noted in the articles.

I think there are a TON of graduating dental students who are eager to help in underserved areas but with loans and the pressure to start in practice, they are unlikely to follow their hearts.

I am really passionate about helping out in medically underserved areas and those w/o access to healthcare. i would love to focus on providing service to people in the developing world too. however i am fearful that 4 years of tuition + living expenses is a significant amount of debt to deal with. when the time comes i will probably opt to start in a practice to begin to put some of that debt to bed if no other options are available to me.

Excellent points and Excellent idea!

 

[Quattro DMD]

Increasing the number of dental schools will not improve the situation. Most dental school graduates go into private practice in middle class suburban areas. In turn the lower income families in urban and rural areas suffer. It's just a fact. And Medicaid reimbursement is incredibly low. Therefore many dentists don't accept it, and this in turn makes it harder for lower income families to find dentists in their area. Couple that with other social factors, like a mother getting time away from work to take their child to the dentist, or the cultural attitude toward dental care. Access to care is an issue on so many levels. And with regards to a "5 year" of dental school, just incorporate 4-6 week community health center rotations during the fourth year that way you expose dental students to community health. With regards to loan repayment, there are many programs, like with the IHS or USPHS, where these centers pay you a salary as well as pay your loans, you just have to find one that has the funds.

 

[doc toothache]

Often our medical/dental neglect comes from our warped sense of priorities rather than from financial insolvency.

 

[DMDreaming]

Yes, medicaid does not reimburse sufficiently, but I am sure a lot of dentists would be willing to take these patients over an empty schedule.

No necessarily. In my home state, Medicaid rates are around 50% of UCR. Overhead at the practice I worked in was approximately 60-65% so serving Medicaid patients meant the practice actually lost money. If this problem is to be addressed, emphasis needs to be placed on raising Medicaid reimbursement to an acceptable level and also on educating the public on the importance of dental care and prevention. Without these two factors, it will be very difficult to change access to care.

 

[djeffreyt]

Access to care is an issue -- I think a better way to alleviate this problem would be to add a 5th year of "dental school" where every dentist is required to go to an underserved area during their last year of "education" and provide care -- students will still graduate after 4 years, but it would be contracted out for each person to go to a underserved area on a first-come first serve basis. In addition to providing care for underserved populations, you would also be getting more experience, enhancing your skills, and becoming more confident and independent. This would not be the same thing as an AEGD -- you would have to do that following your 5th year (if desired). If the ADA implemented something of this nature, the access to care issue would be much better with new dentists in their 5th year every year -- and you could potentially do this with specialties as well -- your last year of specialty training is spent going to underserved areas providing pedo, endo, oms, etc. Now doing this in addition to opening up new schools would be a great start to finding a solution to the problem. Just my opinion though.

This issue has been talked about so often in these forums and in the dental education world, but I think most people are right...it's not a fix...It's just a forced band-aid. While I don't really care one way or the other because I tend to roll with the punches, I think that the best argument against it was said by a faculty member at my school, and I paraphrase:

You (the current students) did not create this problem. It was my generation that created this problem, either by ignoring it, failing to recognize it, or failing to address it. It should not be you (the current students) who are forced to be the solution while we (the older generations of dentists) simply get to continue on as if the problem does not exist. (end paraphase)

So, if they want to mandate a 5th year of dental school, perhaps a 1 year contractual agreement for recertification for all current practicing dentists should also be in order. And since that is about as likely as a 900 lb diabetic vegan, maybe some form in which current dentists are also mandated to assist in solving the problem. After all, if they aren't part of the solution...

 

[DROCKINDAHOUSE]

Healthcare is not a right, it is a privilege.

Such an ignorant statement. Try growing up without it guy and then tell me how much of a PRIVILEGE healthcare is.

One scenario...
Mother: "My son was born with club feet doctor, and unless surgically corrected, he may never walk."
Doctor: "Well lady sorry. I would like to help, but you know healthcare really is a prilege. Guess I can't help if you can't afford it."

 

[Contach]

You know.. with the culture of healthcare in the USA, I am not surprised that some Americans may think that healthcare is a privilege as opposed to a right. Because this is the impression that I get from your country. But it's also relieving to see some proponents of healthcare as a right. It mirrors Canadian values very well. Afterall, in Canada we sacrifice a lot to put comprehensive, universal, first-dollar coverage of medically necessary services (most healthcare) at the top of our priority list.

 

[firecracked]

Although I sympathize with the family who lost their child because of a tooth infection, I do not agree with how these articles always make it appear as though the healthcare system failed these individuals who "cannot" find dental care. Healthcare is not a right, it is a privilege. This does not mean I am not opposed to serving those without access to care -- many, many dentists provide pro bono care at various times throughout the year, and I intend to do just that when I am a practicing dentist. I just don't agree with how the media portrays dentists (and physicians) as the "bad guy" -- just read some of the New York Times articles posted in the past year or so.

I agree with you completely. Health care is not a right. And I'll quote someone who explains this well. And I won't give the name of this person because I don't want people reading the name and then just blowing off the argument. So here it is:

"If you claim medical care as a right, then you are claiming a right to someone's time or property. In either case, you are making a claim to a portion of that person's life. You cannot obtain medical care without someone either spending time on you or supplying you with some sort of product, be it drugs or medical devices. If you're claiming a right to a medical practitioner's time, then you are claiming a right to that portion of his life. If you are claiming a right to some drug or medical equipment, then you are claiming a right to whatever portion of someone's life they spent acquiring or creating that product. Any way you cut it, your claim of a right to health care is a message to someone else that you own a portion of their very existence."

Please note - just because I don't think health care is a right does NOT mean that I think it's okay for some people to suffer. Believe it or not, people who believe health care is not a right are not cold and heartless. I think our health care system needs a lot of reform, but not in the way that everyone else wants reform. To be honest, I'm not sure it's possible to have a 100% perfect health care system where every single person has easy access to high quality care/doctors at an affordable price without having to deal with long lines and shortages and waiting lists, etc etc etc. Socialized medicine has failed in that regard. The US's hybrid system has also failed. As far as I know, a free market system has never been tried in a first world country, but I don't think it would work for various reasons. I think no matter what, we health care professionals will have to do something to help out and do pro bono work as mamelons mentioned.

 

[diplo123]

I agree with you completely. Health care is not a right. And I'll quote someone who explains this well. And I won't give the name of this person because I don't want people reading the name and then just blowing off the argument. So here it is:

"If you claim medical care as a right, then you are claiming a right to someone's time or property. In either case, you are making a claim to a portion of that person's life. You cannot obtain medical care without someone either spending time on you or supplying you with some sort of product, be it drugs or medical devices. If you're claiming a right to a medical practitioner's time, then you are claiming a right to that portion of his life. If you are claiming a right to some drug or medical equipment, then you are claiming a right to whatever portion of someone's life they spent acquiring or creating that product. Any way you cut it, your claim of a right to health care is a message to someone else that you own a portion of their very existence."

Please note - just because I don't think health care is a right does NOT mean that I think it's okay for some people to suffer. Believe it or not, people who believe health care is not a right are not cold and heartless. I think our health care system needs a lot of reform, but not in the way that everyone else wants reform. To be honest, I'm not sure it's possible to have a 100% perfect health care system where every single person has easy access to high quality care/doctors at an affordable price without having to deal with long lines and shortages and waiting lists, etc etc etc. Socialized medicine has failed in that regard. The US's hybrid system has also failed. As far as I know, a free market system has never been tried in a first world country, but I don't think it would work for various reasons. I think no matter what, we health care professionals will have to do something to help out and do pro bono work as mamelons mentioned.

This is ludacris. So is eating food not a right? People who aren't fortunate enough to have money still eat. But somebody had to pick that tomato or cook that beef. health care isn't like a mechanic shop. it's critical to a healthy life, and as an American and future dentist, I hope senator Obama or whoever the next president is provides a government fund for health care insurance. I may not make as much, but I'll have tons of patients and will be satisifed personally.

 

[mamelons]

I agree with you completely. Health care is not a right. And I'll quote someone who explains this well. And I won't give the name of this person because I don't want people reading the name and then just blowing off the argument. So here it is:

"If you claim medical care as a right, then you are claiming a right to someone's time or property. In either case, you are making a claim to a portion of that person's life. You cannot obtain medical care without someone either spending time on you or supplying you with some sort of product, be it drugs or medical devices. If you're claiming a right to a medical practitioner's time, then you are claiming a right to that portion of his life. If you are claiming a right to some drug or medical equipment, then you are claiming a right to whatever portion of someone's life they spent acquiring or creating that product. Any way you cut it, your claim of a right to health care is a message to someone else that you own a portion of their very existence."

Please note - just because I don't think health care is a right does NOT mean that I think it's okay for some people to suffer. Believe it or not, people who believe health care is not a right are not cold and heartless. I think our health care system needs a lot of reform, but not in the way that everyone else wants reform. To be honest, I'm not sure it's possible to have a 100% perfect health care system where every single person has easy access to high quality care/doctors at an affordable price without having to deal with long lines and shortages and waiting lists, etc etc etc. Socialized medicine has failed in that regard. The US's hybrid system has also failed. As far as I know, a free market system has never been tried in a first world country, but I don't think it would work for various reasons. I think no matter what, we health care professionals will have to do something to help out and do pro bono work as mamelons mentioned.

This is exactly where I am coming from. And just because I do not think health care is a right, does not make me cold and heartless -- I have already helped out at many pro bono mission trips and plan to do so throughout my career.

Healthcare is not a right granted to us -- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are.

We all need healthcare, but that does not make it a right.

 

[firecracked]

This is ludacris. So is eating food not a right? People who aren't fortunate enough to have money still eat. But somebody had to pick that tomato or cook that beef. health care isn't like a mechanic shop. it's critical to a healthy life, and as an American and future dentist, I hope senator Obama or whoever the next president is provides a government fund for health care insurance. I may not make as much, but I'll have tons of patients and will be satisifed personally.

This is going to be wayyyy too political, but, here it goes.

It's not ludicrous, and you're missing the point. You have the right to be healthy, and you have the right to eat food. But if you compel someone else to give you those things to you against his will or if you compel someone else to pay for you (via government mandates/laws and taxes, etc), then that's essentially theft and that other person's rights have now been violated in order to fulfill your right. (Or as the quote says, you have claimed part of the provider's life. You think your needs are more important than the time and effort another person must put into serving you.) That's not a win-win situation. Of course, some people don't see it that way. Many people see it as everyone sacrificing for the greater good. In which case, it's not theft since people are giving those things up voluntarily (or it involves a different belief regarding property rights), so denying those things would be a one-sided rights violation. Those are two different philosophies, and neither is right or wrong. Unfortunately, you'll be hard pressed to find a population that uniformly believes one philosophy or another, so there will always be someone who feels his rights are violated. And this is partly the purpose of voting and elections, etc etc. But I'll stop there since it goes much much deeper and this paragraph could go on forever.

Now, I do not think health care is a right. But in my idealistic world, it wouldn't matter because I believe in human generosity and charity - I believe that people would voluntarily help each other without having to have the government force them with the threat of death. And as I mentioned earlier, there is no violation of rights if people do things voluntarily with cooperation. The world, though, is not a utopia. Pure political philosophy isn't always realistic to enact based on a variety of factors. Which is why I don't base my opinion regarding various health care systems solely on whether or not I think health care is a right. Really, for all you know, I could support government funded health insurance just like you.

I'm saying that none of it really matters anyways since I believe there will always be people in need, and we, as health care professionals, should help them regardless of political beliefs. Make sense?

 

[DROCKINDAHOUSE]

I agree with you completely. Health care is not a right. And I'll quote someone who explains this well. And I won't give the name of this person because I don't want people reading the name and then just blowing off the argument. So here it is:

"If you claim medical care as a right, then you are claiming a right to someone's time or property. In either case, you are making a claim to a portion of that person's life. You cannot obtain medical care without someone either spending time on you or supplying you with some sort of product, be it drugs or medical devices. If you're claiming a right to a medical practitioner's time, then you are claiming a right to that portion of his life. If you are claiming a right to some drug or medical equipment, then you are claiming a right to whatever portion of someone's life they spent acquiring or creating that product. Any way you cut it, your claim of a right to health care is a message to someone else that you own a portion of their very existence."

How awesome of you to quote Saddam Hussein

 

[hookem224]

I would say healthcare is a necessity.

 

[Ninster]

I'm with you Andrea, health care is a right, but I think mamelon may be on to something

In my opinion, and of my fellow Canadians, healthcare is definitely a right.

 

[Ninster]

...

 

[La Dentista]

Healthcare is not a right, it is a privilege.

I definitely don't agree with this. I could go on and on about why I don't, but I'm sure I am not the only one feeling this way.
Did you type that without thinking about it?

There are things to support some of the rest of what you said, but that line right there is just completely bothersome.

 

[Andrea368]

Health care is not a right granted to us -- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are.

We all need health care, but that does not make it a right.

Try to pursue happiness with a significantly shortened lifespan, and you and your family constantly sick or injured with no way to afford care.

Universal health care has worked, it has problems (what doesn't?), but I think its safe to say our system is just not cutting it for a significant portion of the country. I think the suggestion of government reimbursement for maybe a year or two of tuition to work at a reduced rate in areas of need is an excellent one, while making dental school more accessible to those of lower income who are qualified.

So dentists may have to go from driving BMW's to Toyota's... small price to pay for the piece of mind that if your recently graduated 22 year old child, who is no longer under your insurance, gets hit by a drunk driver, they won't be paying for it for the next 10 years.

 

[crg3808]

"If you claim medical care as a right, then you are claiming a right to someone's time or property. In either case, you are making a claim to a portion of that person's life. You cannot obtain medical care without someone either spending time on you or supplying you with some sort of product, be it drugs or medical devices. If you're claiming a right to a medical practitioner's time, then you are claiming a right to that portion of his life. If you are claiming a right to some drug or medical equipment, then you are claiming a right to whatever portion of someone's life they spent acquiring or creating that product. Any way you cut it, your claim of a right to health care is a message to someone else that you own a portion of their very existence."

Consider these professions:
Teachers, firefighters and police officers.

Now imagine that only based on your economic status do you get the services of these people. Personally I am thankful that I have the RIGHT to "own a portion of their very existence" ie. get an education, be protected and have my life saved in emergency situations. It would be ludicrous to think that teachers, firefighters and policemen don't know they won't get paid enough for what they do. Let's be honest and realize the only reason doctors/dentists aren't added to these government funded professions is the cut in pay.

Here's food for thought.
"Princeton University professor Uwe Reinhardt, one of the nation's leading authorities on healthcare economics, says the healthcare debate all boils down to a single question. "Should the child of a gas station attendant have the same chance of staying healthy or getting cured, if sick, as the child of a corporate executive?" he asks. Professor Reinhardt says people need to decide whether medical care should be like public education—where every American simply has a right to it—or if it should be treated like a luxury good."

Anyone besides me willing to give up luxury for equality?

 

[Dentgirl09]

Anyone besides me willing to give up luxury for equality?

well put