Talbott

Neuropsychological Misconduct –Making the Data fit the Diagnosis Part 2: Cognitive Impairment

mllangan1 11 Comments

IQ_Dağılımı

Screen Shot 2014-06-23 at 2.24.51 PM

Doctored Wechsler IQ–Boilerplate subtraction of subsets -diagnsosis = cognitive impairment

In May 1999, Dr. G. Douglas Talbott stepped down as president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) down as a jury awarded  Dr. Leonard Masters a judgment of $1.3 million in actual damages and an undisclosed sum in punitive damages for malpractice, fraud, and false imprisonment.  The fraud finding required that the errors in the diagnosis were intentional.

The lawsuit apparently resulted in some changes in the evaluation process.  The errors were deemed intentional in the Masters case as the charts lacked sufficient data for the false diagnosis. Judging by what we see here they are generating intentionally erroneous tests to support an intentionally erroneous diagnosis.

In 2008 I went to Talbott Recovery Center in Atlanta for a 96-hour evaluation due to a positive urine test reported for a substance closely related to a medication I was prescribed.  Despite obtaining a letter from the pharmaceutical manufacturer stating that the drug found in my urine was, in fact, the parent compound of the drug I was prescribed and despite a negative forensic fingernail test  (done by USDTL) I was forced by Linda Bresnahan to have an “assessment.”

I arrived with 4500.00 which was about 500 dollars short for the evaluation. I had requested a forensic hair test  and did not realize they were so expensive.   The primary concern for most of the morning I arrived was when the remaining 500 dollars would arrive. In fact I was told that I would not be able to be admitted until I paid in full.

I had an appointment with an internist, Dr George MacNabb that he cancelled when he found out  I had not  yet paid in full. I have to admit that I, nor anybody I know at MGH, has refused care to a patient based on pre-payment.

The 96-hour assessment included the physical exam, neuropsychological and cognitive testing in addition to drug and alcohol testing by urine and hair.  After finding out my hair test and toxicology screens were negative and in light of my supporting negative nail tests and letter from the pharmaceutical manufacturer I was pretty confident I was good to go but ended up wishing they would have told me the hair test didn’t count before I paid the extra cash.

At the completion of the  96-hour assessment I was brought to their conference room and  told by Dr. Paul Earley and his his assessment team that I needed to stay for treatment.   “I don’t understand,” I said..”I have negative hair (3 months) and nails (6 months), an explanation for the positive test and have never had any problems at work.   I was then told that based on my neuropsychological and cognitive testing I was in denial and “cognitively impaired”  and that they could not advocate for my safely practicing medicine.

I was then taken to accounting to see how I would come up with the 18-25K for treatment. On the last page of my assessment report it states that “Dr Langan agreed with this assessment and recommendations and requested to return home to collect his funds to return for treatment at the Talbott Recovery Campus.”

It is well documented that Talbott will “keep you until the money runs out.”

I had given them a list of people to contact who could verify my work performance was excellent and there were no concerns from anyone including nurses, patients and students.  I asked why they had not contacted my Chief, nurse practitioner or any of my coworkers and was told they had enough information from the PHP Besides, one of them told me “they might cover for you so we can’t put much weight in their opinions.”

My first impression when I started reading the report was that it was another persons assessment given to me by mistake.  The neuropsychology report indicating “denial” I knew was wrong as I recognized the language reporting an elevated L-scale.  Thinking at the time it was an unintentional mistake I asked it be looked at as it was impossible. The L-scale or “Lie-scale” is a “validity” scale that picks up someone trying to portray himself in a positive light so you have to take the rest of the results with a grain of salt. It only works in unsophisticated naive individuals who answer blanket questions related to essentially good an bad behaviors or traits (such as “have you ever lied?”)  believing that is what the audience is looking for.   As a result,  only people bereft of enough common sense to understand that concrete blanket statements are implausible.

Dr. Snook wrote an interpretation of my L-scale as if it were positive ( > 65).  It was later confirmed to be 49 (as normal as normal can be on this) after obtaining the scoring sheet and raw data but even confronted with this he refused to correct it and only did so after the Georgia Psychological Association forced him to.  He engaged in intentional fraud at the request of PHS to show pathology where there is none and in terms of medical ethics there should be zero tolerance for this.  Zero!  Political abuse of psychiatry to give a false diagnosis for economic or political gain is antithetical to both medical and societal ethics.    It is unconscionable in light of all of the doctors who have killed themselves after being evaluated by these programs.

And although I can’t prove it, the  IQ test above was also doctored as I have taken it before and “comprehension” was my best score.   The computer shaves off points to lower comprehension and reasoning subscales and they give a diagnosis of “cognitive impairment.”    I subsequently took it in Boston two weeks later and went back up again!  I wonder what happened in Atlanta?   I could not disprove this one however as there is no raw data generated to prove whether I incorrectly interpreted a proverb or couldn’t tell him what I would do if I found a stamped envelope on the street.

Neuropsychological Misconduct –Making the Data fit the Diagnosis Part 1:  Denial

“To further complicate matters, many evaluation/treatment centers are dependent on state PHP referrals for their financial viability. Because of this if, in its referral of a physician, the PHP highlights a physician as particularly problematic, the evaluation center might–whether consciously or otherwise–tailor its diagnoses and recommendations in a way that will support the PHP’s impression of the physician.”  -John Knight and J. Wesley Boyd.  in “Ethical and Managerial Considerations Regarding State Physician Health Programs,”  Journal of Addiction Medicine  2012

imgres-2

Dr. Stephen Snook, PhD

Confirmatory Distortion

“Confirmatory distortion” is the process by which an evaluator, motivated by the desire to bolster a favored hypothesis, intentionally engages in selective reporting or skewed interpretations of data thereby producing a distorted picture. It is an “indisputable conscious endeavor to find and report information that is supportive of one’s favored hypothesis.10

In other words it is a conscious decision and not an unconscious bias..

I requested Talbot and Dr. Snook address the fraud and rewrite the interpretation and recommendations.  I then complained to PHS not knowing at the time that they were the ones who requested it.  The requests were ignored.

I then filed a complaint with the Georgia Psychological Association. They confirmed the fraud and forced Dr. Snook to correct the test. Below is his apology. An apology received only because his back was to the wall. “Profound apologies”–Give me a break.  There would not be one if the Georgia Psychological Association did not force him to.

Screen Shot 2015-02-08 at 10.28.46 PM

Screen Shot 2015-02-08 at 6.59.19 PM

Screen Shot 2015-02-08 at 10.29.03 PM

I have since spoken to a couple dozen doctors who have the same template on their evaluations.   An elevated L-scale would be unusual in any doctor even if he were an alcoholic or addict. It is only the very naïve and unsophisticated who would think they can show themselves in a positive light by answering questions of obvious attempt such as “I never lie.” And if a class action lawsuit comes about this is one of the items that could be used to prove the systemic fraud. Obtain the score sheets from the facilities on anyone with this same interpretation and it will most likely show fabrication in the same manner.

Next up is the cognitive impairment piece.  Just like the MMPI they manipulate the IQ tests to show cognitive impairment by shaving off points in the executive function subcategories.

Snook is one cog in this system of fraud. He and others like him should have their licenses revoked permanently. There is no excuse. How many careers have ended because of his contribution to this scam? How many have died?

As always with my posts, if he cares to contest it and can disprove the fraud I’ll take the post down. As with all the others they can’t. If they could’ve they would’ve.

And this is the reason I was targeted by Linda Bresnahan.  Upset that I got one of their own in trouble she threatened retribution.   “You won’t be a doctor in five years” she said.   “Dead, relapsed or in jail  I don’t care.”  “Dead?” I said.

“Either that or you’ll wish you were”.   And when Drs. John Knight  and J. Wesley Boyd were removed from PHS and were no longer there to protect me she made good on her threat.  She and Luis Sanchez fabricated an alcohol test in retribution for calling out one of their own.

Physician Suicide, the “Impaired Physician Movement” and ASAM: The Dead Doctors at Ridgeview Institute under G. Douglas Talbott

mllangan1 49 Comments

cropped-hanging_witch_01.jpg

“Gentlemen, it is a disagreeable custom to which one is too easily led by the harshness of the discussions, to assume evil intentions. It is necessary to be gracious as to intentions; one should believe them good, and apparently they are; but we do not have to be gracious at all to inconsistent logic or to absurd reasoning. Bad logicians have committed more involuntary crimes than bad men have done intentionally.”–Pierre S. du Pont (September 25, 1790)

“It is easier to believe a lie one has heard a hundred times than a truth one has never heard before.” –Robert S. Lynd

Ridgeview Institute was a drug and alcohol treatment program for “impaired physicians” in Georgia created by G. Douglas Talbott, a former cardiologist who lost control of his drinking and recovered through the 12-steps of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Up until his death on October 18, 2014 at the age of 90, Talbott  owned and directed a number of treatment facilities for impaired professionals, most recently the Talbott Recovery Campus in Atlanta, one of the preferred referrals for physicians ordered into evaluation and treatment by licensing boards today.

G. Douglas Talbott is a prototypical example of an “impaired physician movement” physician–in fact in many ways he may be considered the”godfather” of the current organization.  He helped organize and serve as past president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) and was a formative figure in the American Medical Association’s (AMA’s) Impaired Physician Program.

Screen-shot-2014-10-20-at-11.00.23-PM-1024x701

G. Douglas Talbott (center), with sons Mark (left) and Dave (right). (image: Ham Biggar)

The cost of a 28-day program for nonprofessionals at Ridgeview in 1987 was $10,000 while the cost was “higher for those going through impaired-health professionals program,” which lasted months rather than 28 days.1

In 1975 after creating the DeKalb County Impaired Physicians Committee for the Medical Association of Georgia, Talbott founded the Georgia Disabled Doctors Program for the assessment and treatment of physicians. Founded in part because “traditional one-month treatment programs are inadequate for disabled doctors,” and they required longer treatment to recover from addiction and substance abuse.   According to Talbott, rehabilitation programs that evaluate and treat the rest of the population for substance abuse issues are incapable of doing so in doctors as they are unlike any other of the inhabitants of our society. Physicians are unique. Unique because of their incredibly high denial”, and he includes this in what he calls the “Four MDs,” “M-Deity”, “Massive Denial” “Militant Defensiveness” and “More Drugs.”2   And these factors set doctors apart from the rest.

According to Talbott, “impaired doctors must first acknowledge their addiction and overcome their ‘terminal uniqueness’ before they can deal with a drug or alcohol problem.” “Terminal uniqueness “ is a phrase Talbott uses to describe doctors’ tendency to think they can heal themselves.

“M-Deity” refers to doctors “being trained to think they’re God;”3 blinded by an overblown sense of self-importance and thinking that they are invincible-an unfounded generalization considering the vast diversity of individuals that make up our profession.   Although this type of personality does exist in medicine,  it is a small minority -just one of many opinions with little probative value offered as factual expertise by the impaired physician movement and now sealed in stone.

Former Assistant Surgeon General (Ret) Admiral (Ret) John C. Duffy

Former Assistant Surgeon General (Ret) Admiral (Ret) John C. Duffy

This attitude, according to some critics, stems from the personal histories of the treatment staff, including Talbott, who are recovering alcoholics and addicts themselves. One such critic was Assistant Surgeon General under C. Everett Koop John C. Duffy who said that Ridgeview suffered from a “boot-camp mentality” toward physicians under their care and “assume every physician suffering from substance abuse is the same lying, stealing, cheating, manipulating individual they were when they had the illness. Certainly some physicians are manipulative, but it’s naïve to label all physicians with these problems.”1

001p3_xlg.preview

LeClair Bissell

American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) President (1981-1983) LeClair Bissell was also highly critical of Talbott’s approach. Bissell, co-author of the first textbook of ethics for addiction professionals4 when asked if there was any justification to the claim that doctors are sicker than other people and more vulnerable to addiction replied:

“Well, based on my treatment experience, I think they are less sick and much easier to treat than many other groups. I think one reason for that is that in order to become a physician…one has to have jumped over a great many hurdles. One must pass the exams, survive the screening tests and the interviews, be able to organize oneself well enough to do examinations and so on, and be observed by a good many colleagues along the way. Therefore I think the more grossly psychotic, or sicker, are frequently screened out along the way. The ones we get in treatment are usually people who are less brain-damaged, are still quite capable of learning, are reasonably bright. Not only that, but they are quite well motivated in most cases to hang on to their licenses, the threat of the loss of which is frequently what puts them in treatment in the first place. So are they hard to treat? No! Are they easy patients? Yes! Are they more likely to be addicted than other groups? We don’t know.”5

“I’m not much for the bullying that goes along with some of these programs,” Bissell commented to the Atlanta Journal and Constitution in 1987.3

The constitution did a series of reports after five inpatients died by suicide during a four-year period at Ridgeview.6 In addition there were at least 20 more who had killed themselves over the preceding 12 years after leaving the treatment center.1

Bissell, the recipient of the 1997 Elizabeth Blackwell Award for outstanding contributions to the cause of women and medicine remarked: “When you’ve got them by the license, that’s pretty strong leverage. You shouldn’t have to pound on them so much. You could be asking for trouble.”3

According to Bissell: “There’s a lot of debate in the field over whether treatment imposed by threats is worthwhile…To a large degree a person has to seek the treatment on his own accord before it will work for him.”3

A jury awarded $1.3 million to the widow of one of the deceased physicians against Ridgeview,7 and other lawsuits initiated on behalf of suicides were settled out of court.6

The Constitution reported that doctors entered the program under threats of loss of licensure “even when they would prefer treatment that is cheaper and closer to home.” 8 The paper also noted that Ridgeview “enjoys unparalleled connections with many local and state medical societies that work with troubled doctors,” “licensing boards often seek recommendations from such groups in devising an approved treatment plan,” and those in charge are often “physicians who themselves have successfully completed Ridgeview’s program.”8

In 1997 William L. White interviewed Bissell whom he called “one of the pioneers in the treatment of impaired professionals.” The interview was not published until after her death in 2008 per her request.   Noting that her book Alcoholism in the Professions9 “remains one of the classics in the field”, White asked her when those in the field began to see physicians and other professionals as a special treatment population; to which she replied:

“When they started making money in alcoholism. As soon as insurance started covering treatment, suddenly you heard that residential treatment was necessary for almost everybody. And since alcoholic docs had tons of money compared to the rest of the public, they not only needed residential treatment, they needed residential treatment in a special treatment facility for many months as opposed to the shorter periods of time that other people needed.”10

Talbott claimed a “92.3 percent recovery rate according to information compiled from a five-year follow-up survey based on complete abstinence and other treatment.”11 A 1995 issue of The Federal Bulletin: The Journal of Medical Licensure and Discipline, published by the Federation of State Medical Boards, contains articles outlining impaired physician programs in 8 separate states. Although these articles were little more than descriptive puff-pieces written by the state PHP program directors and included no described study-design or methodology the Editor notes a success rate of about 90% in these programs and others like them 12 and concludes:

“cooperation and communication between the medical boards and the physician health programs must occur in an effort to protect the public while assisting impaired physicians in their recovery.” 12

No one bothered to examine the methodology to discern the validity of these claims and it is this acceptance of faith without objective assessment that has allowed the impaired physician movement through the ASAM and FSPH to advance their agenda;  confusing ideological opinions with professional knowledge.

“There is nothing special about a doctor’s alcoholism,” said Bissel

“These special facilities will tell you that they come up with really wonderful recovery rates. They do. And the reason they do is that any time you can grab a professional person by the license and compel him or her into treatment and force them to cooperate with that treatment and then monitor them for years, you’ll get good outcomes—in the high 80s or low 90s in recovery rates—no matter what else you do.”10
“The ones I think are really the best ones were not specialized. There were other well-known specialty clinics that claimed all the docs they treated got well, which is sheer rot. They harmed a great many people, keeping them for long, unnecessary treatments and seeing to it that they hit their financial bottom for sure: kids being yanked out of college, being forced to sell homes to pay for treatment, and otherwise being blackmailed on the grounds that your husband has a fatal disease. It’s ugly.”10

Stanton Peele’s “In the Belly of the American Society of Addiction Medicine Beast” describes the coercion, bullying, threats and indoctrination that are standard operating procedure in Talbott’s facilities.13  Uncooperative patients, “and this covers a range of sins of commission or omission including offering one’s opinion about one’s treatment,” are “threatened with expulsion and with not being certified-or advocated for with their Boards.”13

The cornerstone of treatment is 12-step spiritual recovery. All new patients are indoctrinated into A.A. and coerced to confess they are addicts or alcoholics. Failure to participate in A.A. and 12-step spirituality means expulsion from the program with the anticipated result being loss of one’s medical license.

In May 1999 Talbott stepped down as president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) as a jury awarded Dr. Leonard Masters a judgment of $1.3 million in actual damages and an undisclosed sum in punitive damages for fraud, malpractice, and the novel claim of false imprisonment.14

The fraud finding required a finding that errors in the diagnosis were intentional. Masters, who was accused of overprescribing narcotics to his patients was told by the director of the Florida PHP that he could either surrender his medical license until the allegations were disproved or submit to a four-day evaluation.

Masters agreed to the latter, thinking he would have an objective and fair evaluation. He was instead diagnosed as “alcohol dependent” and coerced into “treatment under threat of loss of his medical license. Staff would routinely threaten to report any doctor who questioned any aspect of their diagnosis or treatment to their state medical boards “as being an impaired physician, leaving necessary treatment against medical advice,”14  the equivalent of professional suicide.

Masters, however, was not an alcoholic.

According to his attorney, Eric. S. Block,  “No one ever accused him of having a problem with alcohol. Not his friends, not his wife, not his seven children, not his fellow doctors, not his employees, not his employers, No one.” 15

He was released 4 months later and forced to sign a five-year “continuing care” contract with the PHP, also under continued threat of his medical license.

Talbott faced no professional repercussions and no changes in their treatment philosophy or actions were made. They still haven’t.  They have simply tightened the noose and taken steps to remove accountability.

Up until his recent death, Talbott continued to present himself and ASAM as the most qualified advocates for the assessment and treatment of medical professionals for substance abuse and addiction.16

ASAM and like-minds still do.

In most states today any physician referred for an assessment for substance abuse will be mandated to do so in a facility just like Ridgeview.

There is no choice.   In mechanics and mentality, this same system of coercion, control, and indoctrination has metastasized to almost every state only more powerful and opaque in an unregulated gauntlet protected from public scrutiny, answerable and accountable to no one.  Laissez faire Machiavellian egocentricity unleashed.    For what they have done is taken the Ridgeview model and replicated it over time state by state and tightened the noose.  By subverting the established Physician Health Programs (PHPs) started by state medical societies and staffed by volunteer physicians they eliminated those not believing in the mentality of the groupthink.   They then mandated assessment and treatment of all doctors be done at a “PHP-approved” facility which means a facility identical to Ridgeview.  This was done  under the scaffold of the Federation of State Physician Health Programs (FSPHP).  They are now in charge of all things related to physician wellness in doctors.

  1. Durcanin C, King M. The suicides at Ridgeview Institute: Suicides mar success at Ridgeview with troubled professionals. Atlanta Journal and Constitution. December 18, 1987, 1987: A13.
  2. Gonzales L. When Doctors are Addicts: For physicians getting Drugs is easy. Getting help is not. Chicago Reader. July 28, 1988, 1988.
  3. King M, Durcanin C. The suicides at Ridgeview Institute: A Doctor’s treatment program may be too tough, some say. Atlanta Journal and Constitution. December 18, 1987a, 1987: A12.
  4. Bissell L, Royce JE. Ethics for Addiction Professionals. Center City, Minnesota: Hazelden; 1987.
  5. Addiction Scientists from the USA: LeClair Bissell. In: Edwards G, ed. Addiction: Evolution of a Specialist Field. 1 ed: Wiley, John & Sons, Incorporated; 2002:408.
  6. Durcanin C. The suicides at Ridgeview Institute: Staff members didn’t believe Michigan doctor was suicidal. Atlanta Journal and Constitution. December 18, 1987, 1987: A8.
  7. Ricks WS. Ridgeview Institute loses $1.3 million in suit over suicide. Atlanta Journal and Constitution. October 11, 1987, 1987: A1.
  8. King M, Durcanin C. The suicides at Ridgeview Institute: Many drug-using doctors driven to Ridgeview by fear of losing licenses. Atlanta Journal and Constitution. December 18, 1987b, 1987: A1.
  9. Bissell L, Haberman PW. Alcoholism in the Professions. Oxford University Press; 1984.
  10. White W. Reflections of an addiction treatment pioneer. An Interview with LeClair Bissell, MD (1928-2008), conducted January 22, 1997. Posted at http://www.williamwhitepapers.com. 2011.
  11. Williams c. Health care field chemical dependency threat cited. The Tuscaloosa News. January 16, 1988, 1988: 16.
  12. Schneidman B. The Philosophy of Rehabilitation for Impaired Physicians. The Federal Bulletin: The Journal of Medical Licensure and Discipline. 1995;82(3):125-127.
  13. Peele S. In the Belly of the American Society of Addiction Medicine Beast. The Stanton Peele Addiction Website (accessed March 28, 2014) http://web.archive.org/web/20080514153437/http://www.peele.net/debate/talbott.html.
  14. Ursery S. $1.3M verdict coaxes a deal for doctor’s coerced rehab. Fulton County Daily Report. May 12, 1999b 1999.
  15. Ursery S. I was wrongly held in alcohol center, doctor charges. Fulton Count y Daily Report. April 27, 1999a 1999.
  16. Parker J. George Talbott’s Abuse of Dr. Leon Masters MD ( http://medicalwhistleblowernetwork.jigsy.com/george-talbott-s-abuse-of-leon-masters ). Medical Whistelblower Advocacy Network.

    There is enormous inertia—a tyranny of the status quo—in private and especially governmental arrangements. Only a crisis—actual or perceived—produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable.-Milton Friedman

    Screen Shot 2014-11-19 at 4.27.00 PM

Medical Urban Legend–The Legacy of the 4 MDs and why B.S. Needs to be Identified from the Get-Go!

mllangan1 14 Comments
photo

“Because I can Biotches! That’s right..because I can!” 

According to G. Douglas Talbott, rehabilitation programs that evaluate and treat the rest of the population for substance abuse issues are incapable of doing so in doctors as they are unlike any other inhabitants of our society.   Physicians are unique. Unique because of their incredibly high denial”, and this genetically inherent denial is part of what he calls the “four MDs.” Used to justify the thrice lengthier length of stay in physicians the “four-MDs” are as follows: “M-Deity”, “Massive Denial” “Militant Defensiveness” and “More Drugs.”

He states that “Impaired doctors must first acknowledge their addiction and overcome their ‘terminal uniqueness’ before they can deal with a drug or alcohol problem.”
Now some  doctors are arrogant undisciplined egotists but narcissistic personalities exist in any profession and expanding traits that may apply to a small percentage of doctors to include all doctors as a universal truth contradicts reality. Applying a stereotypical paternalistic length of treatment in doctors three times as long as non-doctors to force a “one-size” fits all treatment on them has no evidence base.

tumblr_kuwuugSEmN1qz6z0no1_500This dicto simpliciter argument can, in fact, be refuted simply by pointing it out! Sadly, no one ever did so the ASAM front-group hasbeen able to establish this caricature of the arrogant paternalistic know it all needing 3 months or more of treatment as standard of care for our profession. They did this by getting medical boards and the FSMB to accept fantasy as fact by relying on board members tendency to accept expert evidence at face value–which they always do and that is a personality characteristic that I would argue is not dicto simpliciter.

Physicians are unique only insofar as the unique elements required of the profession to become and be a physician such as going to medical school and completing the required board examinations.

Any and all doctors referred to a PHP for assessment will spend at least 3 months in treatment if the facility feels it is indicated. It is inevitable. No one has challenged a patently absurd generalization that has absolutely no evidence base or plausible scientific or medical explanation. Of course those sentenced to the 3 or more months have complained but by that time they are de-legitimized and stigmatized. No one to complain to.  After all, these are just redeemed altruistic non-profit  good guys protecting the public and helping colleagues forge a path to salvation!
All the ASAM/FSPHP quacks have to do at that point to deflect legitimate concerns is point out the one doing the complaining is an “addict” who is “in denial” and it is part of his “disease.”  The mere accusation of substance abuse is used to disregard the claims of the accused.
Authoritative opinion entrenched. Someone should have called B.S. long ago.  But no one did and if they had we would not be in the current situation which is only going to go from bad to worse as the ASAM plan for universal contingency-management and urine usury unfolds-–A “golden age.” And the 4MDs Talbott attributes to doctors are all wrong. There is only one MD and it is “medical license.” On second thought that may not be entirely true.  “More money” may be another. And I am not talking about a doctor’s income. I am referring to insurance and the specter of depleting home and hearth.   Fiscal annihilation. Your license or your life.   And the only true  and plausible answer that Talbott could give to justify the lengthy stay is “Because I can biotches!” And “contingency-management” sounds better than extortion doesn’t it?  And  using your medical license as “leverage” sounds a helluva lot better than holding it for ransom.
10561776_1446076165663276_673756111807603530_n-1
The ‘A’ Word: Are Doctors Arrogant?
Leslie Kane
June 17, 2014
Good Doctors Have Some Bad MomentsDoctors’ personalities have become a hot topic, not only because warmth and pleasantness count toward patient satisfaction, but also because positive patient interactions have a role in better outcomes.Physicians’ personalities are under the microscope as patients post reviews of doctors on numerous Websites. In some reviews, the word “arrogant” has shown up. But calling doctors arrogant is nothing new.Are there really so many arrogant doctors? No doubt, some physicians deserve the label, but it seems to be a stereotype that has blossomed and taken on its own life.”Arrogance among doctors is not the norm”, says Marion Stuart, PhD, co-author of The 15 Minute Hour: Therapeutic Talk in Primary Care, and Professor Emeritus in the Department of Family Medicine at UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. “Someone who has done the hard work and has gone into medicine because they care about people, and are interested in helping peoples’ lives and making the world a better place, is not going to be arrogant.”So how did the arrogant doctor epithet arise?In the past, doctors were considered authorities who told compliant patients what to do and treated them with a paternalistic attitude. Some doctors may retain those behaviors today.Another possibility is overgeneralizing. A patient sees a doctor who has a difficult personality and assumes that the trait is more widespread within the profession than it really is.

Arrogance or Self-confidence?

“Arrogance is totally different from self-confidence,” says Dr. Stuart. “When you’re confident, that’s your assessment of your own competence. You have the experience and the wisdom, you know what you can do, and your confidence says that. It’s your relationship to yourself and your own expertise,” she says.

Arrogance is a different ballgame. “This has to do with your judging that other people are inferior,” she says. “It has more to do with not seeing other people as being up to your standards.”

Could the confidence that comes with being accomplished and successful make someone arrogant? Typically no, says Dr. Stuart. The trait of arrogance develops or resides within a person at a much earlier stage, arising from one of two paths:

“I am indeed better.” Someone who has always lived a privileged life, feels entitled to all of the finer things, or has always been looked up to may take it as a given that he or she is better than others. “People who had a sheltered, protected existence with no perception of what the real world is like for other people may consider themselves an elite group, entitled to feel superior,” says Dr. Stuart.

“I made it, so why can’t you?” By contrast, a person who was deprived as a child and worked very hard to pull himself up by the bootstraps may then look down on others who don’t have the same perseverance or initiative to take charge of their life and create similar success.

Doctors Are Harried and Pressured; Patients Are More Demanding

Some doctors have admitted that at times it’s hard to maintain their patience, and frustration triggers a snappish response. Throw into the mix the fact that doctors may have less time to see each patient and answer questions, and you have the ingredients for a negative interaction.

“I’ve had eight years of medical education and I’ve been trying to get my patient to make healthy lifestyle changes, and he comes in with a page ripped out of a tabloid, convinced that the information is right…there’s a limit to how much time I can spend ‘educating’ or convincing them that their ‘cure’ has no scientific basis,” one physician told me.

People have come to expect the stance of “the customer is always right” and get annoyed if doctors don’t accede to all of their requests. But because of new medical practice guidelines, a doctor may not readily give the patient the test or medication they ask for. “Now, with healthcare insurers and companies setting limits on doctors, many times the patient feels that the doctor is not so much on their side, and this could be perceived as arrogant,” says Dr. Stuart.

Is There an Outbreak of Rudeness?

Barry Silverman, MD, a cardiologist and coauthor with pediatrician Saul Adler, MD, of Your Doctors’ Manners Matter: Better Health Through Civility in the Doctor’s Office and in the Hospital, says, “While most doctors are appreciated and respected by their patients, there’s a general perception that professionalism has declined.

“Patients are often more informed, ask detailed questions, and demand a high level of service, while demands on the doctor’s time increase and reimbursements fall,” says Dr. Silverman. “What patients interpret as arrogance is many times a rushed and harried doctor, not an uncaring one. Medicine can be mentally and physically exhausting, but the bottom line is that the doctor must listen and communicate with the patient to deliver quality medical care.”

Still, remaining pleasant and calm is easier for some doctors than for others. There’s no uniform physician personality; many doctors have a natural “people person” inclination, while others are more stoic.

Are doctors expected to smile and be nice in every circumstance, no matter what?

“Professionalism is not about putting on a happy face or being someone you are not; it is about providing quality care for the patient,” says Dr. Adler. “Patients are more informed and have access to more information than ever before. Much of that information is incorrect and sometimes harmful. That means that part of the professional duty is to teach as well as treat.

“Patients understand that doctors have significant restraints on their time, and it is not unreasonable for doctors to use preprinted written materials, educational resources outside the doctor’s personal office, and honest and informative Websites,” says Dr. Adler. “However, under no circumstances should the doctor be rude or abrupt; a smile and kind, considerate behavior is always appropriate.”

It would be naive to say that there aren’t arrogant doctors. But there are far more doctors trying to do their best for patients and relate to them.

Medscape Business of Medicine © 2014 WebMD, LLC

Likeimage