Backing up claims disputing defensive medicineIt’s wrong as the term actually means the act of a physician requesting for an intense test so as to reduce liabilities on their part should they be accused of negligence. It’s to some extent considered unnecessary by a handful of people who not only find it costly but also demeaning.

What is the argument based on?

Ezra Klein, a blogger, has strongly argued against the practice and he makes some extremely strong points to back up his claims. The existence of defensive medicine is not only real and certain, but also quite obvious though it’s not as a result of lawsuits. On the contrary, it’s brought about by the very patients who are supposed to be thankful for the services and treatment that they are getting from the doctors. The logical aspect of it would witness a perfect world where defensive medicine would be defined as procedures that don’t necessarily need to be ordered or executed.

Ironically, the main reasons as to why a lot of the tests ordered due to defensive medicine are carried out don’t have anything to do with suing the doctor. The doctor is insured anyway so it more or less beats logic. The tests are essentially carried out to so as to increase virtual certainty and avoid relying only on probabilistic diagnosis, which in normal circumstances could prove ineffective.

Looking at defensive medicine from a broader perspective

Humans are prone to error as no one is perfect. That said, the doctors and physicians making their rounds in hospitals are live blood and bone and so equally prone to mistakes just anybody else. The medical system that we all get to experience during our visits to hospitals is run by them. They might fall short in some few procedures but that doesn’t make them responsible for the macro medical budget. It’s just out of their hands on this one and people need to start seeing that. Their main objective as loyal workers is to treat with certainty and not with the objective of saving some of the institution’s money.

Conservatives have their work all cut out for them should they possess the need to dispose defensive medicine. They need not break a sweat as the process would be simple and just constitute of bureaucracy, rationing and spending caps.

A few people are of the  school of thought that increased high-deductibles HAS will go a long way in helping reduce the number of defensive tests that patients are required to take. A lot of them are actually unwilling pay for any of the tests in the first place. They’d prefer having proper documents to avoid any inconvenience and unnecessary expenses. There needs to be a sort of balance found for the sake of not only restoring sanity in the industry, but also ensuring that both parties, doctors and patients, are comfortable.