User login
Do we need LinkedIn?
Do we physicians need LinkedIn? It depends. LinkedIn is the No. 1 social platform for professionals. However, many physicians feel that if they aren’t looking for a job, then LinkedIn isn’t useful. However, spending an hour to complete your LinkedIn profile may bring you more value than you imagined. That’s because LinkedIn is ranked highly by search engines, which means that when people, including patients or colleagues, search for information about you online, your LinkedIn profile will most likely show up. LinkedIn is important because it helps people find out about your educational background, professional experiences, and personal brand.
Because it’s easy, both to complete your profile and to use, LinkedIn is a good starting point for physicians who are trying to create a digital footprint. Moreover, unlike online physician review sites, you are in control of the content on your LinkedIn profile, so it’s a way for you to build your brand and showcase your expertise.
There are no ratings, but you can be endorsed by other LinkedIn members. Are you board certified? An expert in skin cancer? Do you do clinical research? Your colleagues can (and will) endorse you for those skills. Do the same for them. Importantly, when patients search for you, they will see that your colleagues have endorsed you for your excellence in those areas.
Ready to start using LinkedIn? It’s easy: Go to LinkedIn.com, select “register,” then fill out your profile. Be sure to include your educational background, medical expertise, areas of interest, professional experience, and links to your practice site online. Be thorough, because members with more complete profiles rank higher in search results.
Here are 15 tips for maximizing LinkedIn:
1. Upload a professional photo of yourself. According to LinkedIn data, users with photos are seven times more likely to be contacted about opportunities.
2. Use keywords to optimize your profile, including the name and geographic location of your practice.
3. List at least five skills that represent you accurately as a physician. For dermatologists, they might include, “Mohs” or “psoriasis expert.” (Resist the temptation to embellish.)
4. Build your network organically by starting with connections to people you already know. Unlike with Twitter or other social platforms, expert LinkedIn users do not accept connection requests to people they don’t know. If you really want to connect with someone, then ask a mutual connection for an introduction.
5. Aim for a minimum of 50 connections, which will improve your ranking on search results.
6. Include a link to your practice website, as well as contact information including your office address and phone number. LinkedIn is highly ranked by search engines, so it can drive traffic to your practice’s site, potentially leading to new clients.
7. Unlike with Twitter and Facebook, which encourage users to post personal experiences, LinkedIn content should be professional. Post pictures of your kid’s birthday party on Facebook. Post an article you’ve written about eczema on LinkedIn. Share links to quality content that will be valuable to your network.
8. Participate by sharing an academic or news article, recommending someone, or commenting on a group discussion. Shorts bursts of activity are fine on this social platform.
9. Be generous but selective with your recommendations, as they are a reflection of you. If you wouldn’t recommend that person in real life, then don’t recommend him or her on LinkedIn.
10. When asking someone for a recommendation, be specific. Specify which skills you’d like them to mention.
11. Consider joining LinkedIn Groups that match your professional expertise and interests. Participating in groups is a great way to show your expertise and manage relationships. Some examples of groups to which physicians belong include “Healthcare Physician Practice Management,” “The Medical Doctor (MD) Network,” and “Networking for Business Professionals and Doctors.”
12. To broaden your professional horizons, consider joining LinkedIn Groups that aren’t in your specialty. For example, you might be a practicing dermatologist who is hoping to start a telemedicine program. In that case, you should consider joining telemedicine or mHealth groups.
13. Include a link to your LinkedIn profile in your e-mail signature, on business cards, and on your practice website.
14. If you used LinkedIn to share original content such as blog posts or academic articles, or to stay abreast of news in your field, then consider using Pulse, an app that makes it easier to consume information on mobile devices.
15. Use the LinkedIn Events Page to promote upcoming events.
So next time you’re on LinkedIn, ask me to endorse you. So long as it’s not for president, I got you.
Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Benabio is @dermdoc on Twitter.
Do we physicians need LinkedIn? It depends. LinkedIn is the No. 1 social platform for professionals. However, many physicians feel that if they aren’t looking for a job, then LinkedIn isn’t useful. However, spending an hour to complete your LinkedIn profile may bring you more value than you imagined. That’s because LinkedIn is ranked highly by search engines, which means that when people, including patients or colleagues, search for information about you online, your LinkedIn profile will most likely show up. LinkedIn is important because it helps people find out about your educational background, professional experiences, and personal brand.
Because it’s easy, both to complete your profile and to use, LinkedIn is a good starting point for physicians who are trying to create a digital footprint. Moreover, unlike online physician review sites, you are in control of the content on your LinkedIn profile, so it’s a way for you to build your brand and showcase your expertise.
There are no ratings, but you can be endorsed by other LinkedIn members. Are you board certified? An expert in skin cancer? Do you do clinical research? Your colleagues can (and will) endorse you for those skills. Do the same for them. Importantly, when patients search for you, they will see that your colleagues have endorsed you for your excellence in those areas.
Ready to start using LinkedIn? It’s easy: Go to LinkedIn.com, select “register,” then fill out your profile. Be sure to include your educational background, medical expertise, areas of interest, professional experience, and links to your practice site online. Be thorough, because members with more complete profiles rank higher in search results.
Here are 15 tips for maximizing LinkedIn:
1. Upload a professional photo of yourself. According to LinkedIn data, users with photos are seven times more likely to be contacted about opportunities.
2. Use keywords to optimize your profile, including the name and geographic location of your practice.
3. List at least five skills that represent you accurately as a physician. For dermatologists, they might include, “Mohs” or “psoriasis expert.” (Resist the temptation to embellish.)
4. Build your network organically by starting with connections to people you already know. Unlike with Twitter or other social platforms, expert LinkedIn users do not accept connection requests to people they don’t know. If you really want to connect with someone, then ask a mutual connection for an introduction.
5. Aim for a minimum of 50 connections, which will improve your ranking on search results.
6. Include a link to your practice website, as well as contact information including your office address and phone number. LinkedIn is highly ranked by search engines, so it can drive traffic to your practice’s site, potentially leading to new clients.
7. Unlike with Twitter and Facebook, which encourage users to post personal experiences, LinkedIn content should be professional. Post pictures of your kid’s birthday party on Facebook. Post an article you’ve written about eczema on LinkedIn. Share links to quality content that will be valuable to your network.
8. Participate by sharing an academic or news article, recommending someone, or commenting on a group discussion. Shorts bursts of activity are fine on this social platform.
9. Be generous but selective with your recommendations, as they are a reflection of you. If you wouldn’t recommend that person in real life, then don’t recommend him or her on LinkedIn.
10. When asking someone for a recommendation, be specific. Specify which skills you’d like them to mention.
11. Consider joining LinkedIn Groups that match your professional expertise and interests. Participating in groups is a great way to show your expertise and manage relationships. Some examples of groups to which physicians belong include “Healthcare Physician Practice Management,” “The Medical Doctor (MD) Network,” and “Networking for Business Professionals and Doctors.”
12. To broaden your professional horizons, consider joining LinkedIn Groups that aren’t in your specialty. For example, you might be a practicing dermatologist who is hoping to start a telemedicine program. In that case, you should consider joining telemedicine or mHealth groups.
13. Include a link to your LinkedIn profile in your e-mail signature, on business cards, and on your practice website.
14. If you used LinkedIn to share original content such as blog posts or academic articles, or to stay abreast of news in your field, then consider using Pulse, an app that makes it easier to consume information on mobile devices.
15. Use the LinkedIn Events Page to promote upcoming events.
So next time you’re on LinkedIn, ask me to endorse you. So long as it’s not for president, I got you.
Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Benabio is @dermdoc on Twitter.
Do we physicians need LinkedIn? It depends. LinkedIn is the No. 1 social platform for professionals. However, many physicians feel that if they aren’t looking for a job, then LinkedIn isn’t useful. However, spending an hour to complete your LinkedIn profile may bring you more value than you imagined. That’s because LinkedIn is ranked highly by search engines, which means that when people, including patients or colleagues, search for information about you online, your LinkedIn profile will most likely show up. LinkedIn is important because it helps people find out about your educational background, professional experiences, and personal brand.
Because it’s easy, both to complete your profile and to use, LinkedIn is a good starting point for physicians who are trying to create a digital footprint. Moreover, unlike online physician review sites, you are in control of the content on your LinkedIn profile, so it’s a way for you to build your brand and showcase your expertise.
There are no ratings, but you can be endorsed by other LinkedIn members. Are you board certified? An expert in skin cancer? Do you do clinical research? Your colleagues can (and will) endorse you for those skills. Do the same for them. Importantly, when patients search for you, they will see that your colleagues have endorsed you for your excellence in those areas.
Ready to start using LinkedIn? It’s easy: Go to LinkedIn.com, select “register,” then fill out your profile. Be sure to include your educational background, medical expertise, areas of interest, professional experience, and links to your practice site online. Be thorough, because members with more complete profiles rank higher in search results.
Here are 15 tips for maximizing LinkedIn:
1. Upload a professional photo of yourself. According to LinkedIn data, users with photos are seven times more likely to be contacted about opportunities.
2. Use keywords to optimize your profile, including the name and geographic location of your practice.
3. List at least five skills that represent you accurately as a physician. For dermatologists, they might include, “Mohs” or “psoriasis expert.” (Resist the temptation to embellish.)
4. Build your network organically by starting with connections to people you already know. Unlike with Twitter or other social platforms, expert LinkedIn users do not accept connection requests to people they don’t know. If you really want to connect with someone, then ask a mutual connection for an introduction.
5. Aim for a minimum of 50 connections, which will improve your ranking on search results.
6. Include a link to your practice website, as well as contact information including your office address and phone number. LinkedIn is highly ranked by search engines, so it can drive traffic to your practice’s site, potentially leading to new clients.
7. Unlike with Twitter and Facebook, which encourage users to post personal experiences, LinkedIn content should be professional. Post pictures of your kid’s birthday party on Facebook. Post an article you’ve written about eczema on LinkedIn. Share links to quality content that will be valuable to your network.
8. Participate by sharing an academic or news article, recommending someone, or commenting on a group discussion. Shorts bursts of activity are fine on this social platform.
9. Be generous but selective with your recommendations, as they are a reflection of you. If you wouldn’t recommend that person in real life, then don’t recommend him or her on LinkedIn.
10. When asking someone for a recommendation, be specific. Specify which skills you’d like them to mention.
11. Consider joining LinkedIn Groups that match your professional expertise and interests. Participating in groups is a great way to show your expertise and manage relationships. Some examples of groups to which physicians belong include “Healthcare Physician Practice Management,” “The Medical Doctor (MD) Network,” and “Networking for Business Professionals and Doctors.”
12. To broaden your professional horizons, consider joining LinkedIn Groups that aren’t in your specialty. For example, you might be a practicing dermatologist who is hoping to start a telemedicine program. In that case, you should consider joining telemedicine or mHealth groups.
13. Include a link to your LinkedIn profile in your e-mail signature, on business cards, and on your practice website.
14. If you used LinkedIn to share original content such as blog posts or academic articles, or to stay abreast of news in your field, then consider using Pulse, an app that makes it easier to consume information on mobile devices.
15. Use the LinkedIn Events Page to promote upcoming events.
So next time you’re on LinkedIn, ask me to endorse you. So long as it’s not for president, I got you.
Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Benabio is @dermdoc on Twitter.
The tipping point for value-based pay?
Over the last several years, doctors and other health care professionals – no doubt including many readers of this column – have worked to develop the accountable care organization model from an academic idea into a meaningful presence in the health care marketplace.
In January, the federal government threw its considerable weight squarely behind that effort, for the first time setting clear goals for ramping up the use of ACOs and other alternative payment models in Medicare.
In an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine, Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell announced that by the end of 2016, her agency plans to have 30% of all Medicare payments “tied to quality through alternative payment models,” including ACOs, patient-centered medical homes, and bundled payments – and to have 50% of Medicare payments made under alternative payment models by the end of 2018.
Furthermore, even among the payments that remain under the fee-for-service model, the vast majority will be linked to quality and value in some way – 85% by 2016, and 90% by 2018.
Right now, only about 20% of Medicare payments are made through alternative payment models, meaning that HHS’ new goals entail a 50% increase in the quantity of Medicare dollars going to alternative payment models by the end of next year, and a 150% increase by the end of 2018. In 2014, Medicare made $362 billion in fee-for-service payments – a huge number, much of which increasingly will be directed toward ACOs.
“We believe these goals can drive transformative change, help us manage and track progress, and create accountability for measurable improvement,” Secretary Burwell said in a press release accompanying the announcement.
“Ultimately, this is about improving the health of each person by making the best use of our resources for patient good,” Dr. Douglas E. Henley, CEO of the American Academy of Family Physicians, noted in the same press release. “We’re on board, and we’re committed to changing how we pay for and deliver care to achieve better health.”
Of course, setting ambitious goals is not the same thing as meeting them, and many details have yet to be ironed out. Will the administration focus on ACOs or on other alternative payment models such as bundled payments? How will it measure quality? And Medicare, though massive, is only one part of the health industry. To what extent will the rest of the industry join in the federal government’s push toward accountable care?
To help answer these questions, HHS also announced that it is creating the Health Care Payment Learning and Action Network, which “will accelerate the transition to more advanced payment models by fostering collaboration between HHS, private payers, large employers, providers, consumers, and state and federal partners.”
January’s announcement is the strongest signal yet that the federal government has bought into the idea of paying for value, not volume, and that it is willing to invest substantially in the emerging accountable care model.
Mr. Bobbitt is a senior partner and head of the health law group at the Smith Anderson law firm in Raleigh, N.C. Mr. Wilson is an associate at Smith Anderson. This article is meant to be educational and does not constitute legal advice. For additional information, readers may contact the authors at [email protected] or [email protected], or by phone at 919-821-6612.
Over the last several years, doctors and other health care professionals – no doubt including many readers of this column – have worked to develop the accountable care organization model from an academic idea into a meaningful presence in the health care marketplace.
In January, the federal government threw its considerable weight squarely behind that effort, for the first time setting clear goals for ramping up the use of ACOs and other alternative payment models in Medicare.
In an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine, Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell announced that by the end of 2016, her agency plans to have 30% of all Medicare payments “tied to quality through alternative payment models,” including ACOs, patient-centered medical homes, and bundled payments – and to have 50% of Medicare payments made under alternative payment models by the end of 2018.
Furthermore, even among the payments that remain under the fee-for-service model, the vast majority will be linked to quality and value in some way – 85% by 2016, and 90% by 2018.
Right now, only about 20% of Medicare payments are made through alternative payment models, meaning that HHS’ new goals entail a 50% increase in the quantity of Medicare dollars going to alternative payment models by the end of next year, and a 150% increase by the end of 2018. In 2014, Medicare made $362 billion in fee-for-service payments – a huge number, much of which increasingly will be directed toward ACOs.
“We believe these goals can drive transformative change, help us manage and track progress, and create accountability for measurable improvement,” Secretary Burwell said in a press release accompanying the announcement.
“Ultimately, this is about improving the health of each person by making the best use of our resources for patient good,” Dr. Douglas E. Henley, CEO of the American Academy of Family Physicians, noted in the same press release. “We’re on board, and we’re committed to changing how we pay for and deliver care to achieve better health.”
Of course, setting ambitious goals is not the same thing as meeting them, and many details have yet to be ironed out. Will the administration focus on ACOs or on other alternative payment models such as bundled payments? How will it measure quality? And Medicare, though massive, is only one part of the health industry. To what extent will the rest of the industry join in the federal government’s push toward accountable care?
To help answer these questions, HHS also announced that it is creating the Health Care Payment Learning and Action Network, which “will accelerate the transition to more advanced payment models by fostering collaboration between HHS, private payers, large employers, providers, consumers, and state and federal partners.”
January’s announcement is the strongest signal yet that the federal government has bought into the idea of paying for value, not volume, and that it is willing to invest substantially in the emerging accountable care model.
Mr. Bobbitt is a senior partner and head of the health law group at the Smith Anderson law firm in Raleigh, N.C. Mr. Wilson is an associate at Smith Anderson. This article is meant to be educational and does not constitute legal advice. For additional information, readers may contact the authors at [email protected] or [email protected], or by phone at 919-821-6612.
Over the last several years, doctors and other health care professionals – no doubt including many readers of this column – have worked to develop the accountable care organization model from an academic idea into a meaningful presence in the health care marketplace.
In January, the federal government threw its considerable weight squarely behind that effort, for the first time setting clear goals for ramping up the use of ACOs and other alternative payment models in Medicare.
In an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine, Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell announced that by the end of 2016, her agency plans to have 30% of all Medicare payments “tied to quality through alternative payment models,” including ACOs, patient-centered medical homes, and bundled payments – and to have 50% of Medicare payments made under alternative payment models by the end of 2018.
Furthermore, even among the payments that remain under the fee-for-service model, the vast majority will be linked to quality and value in some way – 85% by 2016, and 90% by 2018.
Right now, only about 20% of Medicare payments are made through alternative payment models, meaning that HHS’ new goals entail a 50% increase in the quantity of Medicare dollars going to alternative payment models by the end of next year, and a 150% increase by the end of 2018. In 2014, Medicare made $362 billion in fee-for-service payments – a huge number, much of which increasingly will be directed toward ACOs.
“We believe these goals can drive transformative change, help us manage and track progress, and create accountability for measurable improvement,” Secretary Burwell said in a press release accompanying the announcement.
“Ultimately, this is about improving the health of each person by making the best use of our resources for patient good,” Dr. Douglas E. Henley, CEO of the American Academy of Family Physicians, noted in the same press release. “We’re on board, and we’re committed to changing how we pay for and deliver care to achieve better health.”
Of course, setting ambitious goals is not the same thing as meeting them, and many details have yet to be ironed out. Will the administration focus on ACOs or on other alternative payment models such as bundled payments? How will it measure quality? And Medicare, though massive, is only one part of the health industry. To what extent will the rest of the industry join in the federal government’s push toward accountable care?
To help answer these questions, HHS also announced that it is creating the Health Care Payment Learning and Action Network, which “will accelerate the transition to more advanced payment models by fostering collaboration between HHS, private payers, large employers, providers, consumers, and state and federal partners.”
January’s announcement is the strongest signal yet that the federal government has bought into the idea of paying for value, not volume, and that it is willing to invest substantially in the emerging accountable care model.
Mr. Bobbitt is a senior partner and head of the health law group at the Smith Anderson law firm in Raleigh, N.C. Mr. Wilson is an associate at Smith Anderson. This article is meant to be educational and does not constitute legal advice. For additional information, readers may contact the authors at [email protected] or [email protected], or by phone at 919-821-6612.
Visit your office
Every year around now, as spring begins to revive the landscape, I like to take a tour of my office from the perspective of a patient visiting our facility for the first time, because more often than not, the internal environment could use a bit of a revival as well.
We tend not to notice gradual deterioration in the workplace we inhabit every day: Carpets fade and dull with constant traffic and cleaning; wallpaper and paint accumulate dirt, stains, and damage; furniture gets dirty and dented, fabric rips, hardware goes missing.
When did you last take a good look at your waiting room? Have your patients been snacking and spilling drinks in there, despite the signs begging them not to? Is the wallpaper smudged on the walls behind chairs, where they rest their heads? How are the carpeting and upholstery holding up?
Even if you don’t find anything obvious, it’s wise to check periodically for subtle evidence of age: Find some patches of protected carpeting and flooring – under desks, for example – and compare them with exposed floors.
And look at the decor itself; is it dated or just plain old looking? Any interior designer will tell you he or she can determine quite accurately when a space was last decorated, simply by the color and style of the materials used. If your office is stuck in the ’90s, it’s probably time for a change.
If you’re planning a vacation this summer (and I hope you are), that would be the perfect time for a redo. Your patients will be spared the dust and turmoil, tradespeople won’t have to work around your office hours, and you won’t have to cancel any hours that weren’t already canceled. Best of all, you’ll come back to a clean, fresh environment.
Start by reviewing your color scheme. If it’s hopelessly out of date and style, or if you are just tired of it, change it. Wallpaper and carpeting should be long-wearing industrial quality, paint should be high-quality eggshell finish to facilitate cleaning, and everything should be professionally applied. (This is neither the time nor place for do-it-yourself experiments.) And get your building’s maintenance crew to fix any nagging plumbing, electrical, or heating/air conditioning problems while pipes, ducts, and wires are more readily accessible.
If your wall decorations are dated and unattractive, now would be a good time to replace at least some of them. This need not be an expensive proposition. I recently redecorated my exam room walls with framed photos from my travel adventures, to very positive responses from patients and staff alike. If you’re not an artist or photographer, invite family members, local artists, or talented patients to display some of their creations on your walls.
Plants are great accents and excellent stress reducers for apprehensive patients, yet many offices have little or no plant life. If you are hesitant to take on the extra work of plant upkeep, consider using one of the many corporate plant services that rent you the plants, keep them healthy, and replace them as necessary.
Furniture is another important element in keeping your office environment fresh and inviting. You may be able to resurface and reupholster what you have now, but if not, shop carefully. Beware of nonmedical products promoted specifically to physicians, as they tend to be overpriced. If you shop online, remember to factor in shipping costs, which can be considerable for furniture. Don’t be afraid to ask for discounts; you won’t get them if you don’t ask.
This is also a good time to clear out old textbooks, magazines, and files that you will never open again – not in this digital age.
Finally, spruce-up time is an excellent opportunity to inventory your medical equipment. We’ve all seen vintage offices full of gadgets that were state-of-the-art decades ago. Nostalgia is nice, but would you want to be treated by a physician whose office could be a Smithsonian exhibit titled, “Doctor’s Office Circa 1975?” Neither would your patients, for the most part. In fact, many of them – particularly younger ones – assume that doctors who don’t keep up with technologic innovations don’t keep up with anything else, either.
Dr. Eastern practices dermatology and dermatologic surgery in Belleville, N.J. He is the author of numerous articles and textbook chapters, and is a longtime monthly columnist for Dermatology News.
Every year around now, as spring begins to revive the landscape, I like to take a tour of my office from the perspective of a patient visiting our facility for the first time, because more often than not, the internal environment could use a bit of a revival as well.
We tend not to notice gradual deterioration in the workplace we inhabit every day: Carpets fade and dull with constant traffic and cleaning; wallpaper and paint accumulate dirt, stains, and damage; furniture gets dirty and dented, fabric rips, hardware goes missing.
When did you last take a good look at your waiting room? Have your patients been snacking and spilling drinks in there, despite the signs begging them not to? Is the wallpaper smudged on the walls behind chairs, where they rest their heads? How are the carpeting and upholstery holding up?
Even if you don’t find anything obvious, it’s wise to check periodically for subtle evidence of age: Find some patches of protected carpeting and flooring – under desks, for example – and compare them with exposed floors.
And look at the decor itself; is it dated or just plain old looking? Any interior designer will tell you he or she can determine quite accurately when a space was last decorated, simply by the color and style of the materials used. If your office is stuck in the ’90s, it’s probably time for a change.
If you’re planning a vacation this summer (and I hope you are), that would be the perfect time for a redo. Your patients will be spared the dust and turmoil, tradespeople won’t have to work around your office hours, and you won’t have to cancel any hours that weren’t already canceled. Best of all, you’ll come back to a clean, fresh environment.
Start by reviewing your color scheme. If it’s hopelessly out of date and style, or if you are just tired of it, change it. Wallpaper and carpeting should be long-wearing industrial quality, paint should be high-quality eggshell finish to facilitate cleaning, and everything should be professionally applied. (This is neither the time nor place for do-it-yourself experiments.) And get your building’s maintenance crew to fix any nagging plumbing, electrical, or heating/air conditioning problems while pipes, ducts, and wires are more readily accessible.
If your wall decorations are dated and unattractive, now would be a good time to replace at least some of them. This need not be an expensive proposition. I recently redecorated my exam room walls with framed photos from my travel adventures, to very positive responses from patients and staff alike. If you’re not an artist or photographer, invite family members, local artists, or talented patients to display some of their creations on your walls.
Plants are great accents and excellent stress reducers for apprehensive patients, yet many offices have little or no plant life. If you are hesitant to take on the extra work of plant upkeep, consider using one of the many corporate plant services that rent you the plants, keep them healthy, and replace them as necessary.
Furniture is another important element in keeping your office environment fresh and inviting. You may be able to resurface and reupholster what you have now, but if not, shop carefully. Beware of nonmedical products promoted specifically to physicians, as they tend to be overpriced. If you shop online, remember to factor in shipping costs, which can be considerable for furniture. Don’t be afraid to ask for discounts; you won’t get them if you don’t ask.
This is also a good time to clear out old textbooks, magazines, and files that you will never open again – not in this digital age.
Finally, spruce-up time is an excellent opportunity to inventory your medical equipment. We’ve all seen vintage offices full of gadgets that were state-of-the-art decades ago. Nostalgia is nice, but would you want to be treated by a physician whose office could be a Smithsonian exhibit titled, “Doctor’s Office Circa 1975?” Neither would your patients, for the most part. In fact, many of them – particularly younger ones – assume that doctors who don’t keep up with technologic innovations don’t keep up with anything else, either.
Dr. Eastern practices dermatology and dermatologic surgery in Belleville, N.J. He is the author of numerous articles and textbook chapters, and is a longtime monthly columnist for Dermatology News.
Every year around now, as spring begins to revive the landscape, I like to take a tour of my office from the perspective of a patient visiting our facility for the first time, because more often than not, the internal environment could use a bit of a revival as well.
We tend not to notice gradual deterioration in the workplace we inhabit every day: Carpets fade and dull with constant traffic and cleaning; wallpaper and paint accumulate dirt, stains, and damage; furniture gets dirty and dented, fabric rips, hardware goes missing.
When did you last take a good look at your waiting room? Have your patients been snacking and spilling drinks in there, despite the signs begging them not to? Is the wallpaper smudged on the walls behind chairs, where they rest their heads? How are the carpeting and upholstery holding up?
Even if you don’t find anything obvious, it’s wise to check periodically for subtle evidence of age: Find some patches of protected carpeting and flooring – under desks, for example – and compare them with exposed floors.
And look at the decor itself; is it dated or just plain old looking? Any interior designer will tell you he or she can determine quite accurately when a space was last decorated, simply by the color and style of the materials used. If your office is stuck in the ’90s, it’s probably time for a change.
If you’re planning a vacation this summer (and I hope you are), that would be the perfect time for a redo. Your patients will be spared the dust and turmoil, tradespeople won’t have to work around your office hours, and you won’t have to cancel any hours that weren’t already canceled. Best of all, you’ll come back to a clean, fresh environment.
Start by reviewing your color scheme. If it’s hopelessly out of date and style, or if you are just tired of it, change it. Wallpaper and carpeting should be long-wearing industrial quality, paint should be high-quality eggshell finish to facilitate cleaning, and everything should be professionally applied. (This is neither the time nor place for do-it-yourself experiments.) And get your building’s maintenance crew to fix any nagging plumbing, electrical, or heating/air conditioning problems while pipes, ducts, and wires are more readily accessible.
If your wall decorations are dated and unattractive, now would be a good time to replace at least some of them. This need not be an expensive proposition. I recently redecorated my exam room walls with framed photos from my travel adventures, to very positive responses from patients and staff alike. If you’re not an artist or photographer, invite family members, local artists, or talented patients to display some of their creations on your walls.
Plants are great accents and excellent stress reducers for apprehensive patients, yet many offices have little or no plant life. If you are hesitant to take on the extra work of plant upkeep, consider using one of the many corporate plant services that rent you the plants, keep them healthy, and replace them as necessary.
Furniture is another important element in keeping your office environment fresh and inviting. You may be able to resurface and reupholster what you have now, but if not, shop carefully. Beware of nonmedical products promoted specifically to physicians, as they tend to be overpriced. If you shop online, remember to factor in shipping costs, which can be considerable for furniture. Don’t be afraid to ask for discounts; you won’t get them if you don’t ask.
This is also a good time to clear out old textbooks, magazines, and files that you will never open again – not in this digital age.
Finally, spruce-up time is an excellent opportunity to inventory your medical equipment. We’ve all seen vintage offices full of gadgets that were state-of-the-art decades ago. Nostalgia is nice, but would you want to be treated by a physician whose office could be a Smithsonian exhibit titled, “Doctor’s Office Circa 1975?” Neither would your patients, for the most part. In fact, many of them – particularly younger ones – assume that doctors who don’t keep up with technologic innovations don’t keep up with anything else, either.
Dr. Eastern practices dermatology and dermatologic surgery in Belleville, N.J. He is the author of numerous articles and textbook chapters, and is a longtime monthly columnist for Dermatology News.
In Response to "Going for the Gold"
Hello Dr. Danielsen,
Your statement about the profit-driven health system captured my attention.
The US health care system is probably the most expensive in the world, and yet it was rated the worst in terms of its overall ranking for quality of care, access, and efficiency. (I got this information while I was in graduate school studying health care policy.) This resonates with your statement about the entrepreneurial and corporatized US health care system.
I surmise that the high cost of health care may be partly due to the over-utilization of services, and technology and drug charges that may not be necessarily effective. As a researcher, I support the role of Comparative Effectiveness Research as a cost-efficiency strategy by identifying and eliminating the "me too" drugs and services that are found to be less or not efficacious.
As a supporter of the PA profession, I think PAs are part of the solution to help mitigate the deficiency in access to health care. In addition, using PAs in place of physicians for certain services can defray the rising cost of health care. There's been data to show that PAs can perform 80% of the duties performed by physicians. PAs should find the right platform to be heard and integrated into all state or federal health care programs.
Maribelle Guloy, MSHS, CCRP
Executive Director
Clinical Research
Montebello, California
Hello Dr. Danielsen,
Your statement about the profit-driven health system captured my attention.
The US health care system is probably the most expensive in the world, and yet it was rated the worst in terms of its overall ranking for quality of care, access, and efficiency. (I got this information while I was in graduate school studying health care policy.) This resonates with your statement about the entrepreneurial and corporatized US health care system.
I surmise that the high cost of health care may be partly due to the over-utilization of services, and technology and drug charges that may not be necessarily effective. As a researcher, I support the role of Comparative Effectiveness Research as a cost-efficiency strategy by identifying and eliminating the "me too" drugs and services that are found to be less or not efficacious.
As a supporter of the PA profession, I think PAs are part of the solution to help mitigate the deficiency in access to health care. In addition, using PAs in place of physicians for certain services can defray the rising cost of health care. There's been data to show that PAs can perform 80% of the duties performed by physicians. PAs should find the right platform to be heard and integrated into all state or federal health care programs.
Maribelle Guloy, MSHS, CCRP
Executive Director
Clinical Research
Montebello, California
Hello Dr. Danielsen,
Your statement about the profit-driven health system captured my attention.
The US health care system is probably the most expensive in the world, and yet it was rated the worst in terms of its overall ranking for quality of care, access, and efficiency. (I got this information while I was in graduate school studying health care policy.) This resonates with your statement about the entrepreneurial and corporatized US health care system.
I surmise that the high cost of health care may be partly due to the over-utilization of services, and technology and drug charges that may not be necessarily effective. As a researcher, I support the role of Comparative Effectiveness Research as a cost-efficiency strategy by identifying and eliminating the "me too" drugs and services that are found to be less or not efficacious.
As a supporter of the PA profession, I think PAs are part of the solution to help mitigate the deficiency in access to health care. In addition, using PAs in place of physicians for certain services can defray the rising cost of health care. There's been data to show that PAs can perform 80% of the duties performed by physicians. PAs should find the right platform to be heard and integrated into all state or federal health care programs.
Maribelle Guloy, MSHS, CCRP
Executive Director
Clinical Research
Montebello, California
Pediatrician says we are martyring children to measles
Religious exemptions to vaccinations are a contradiction in terms and should be eliminated, Dr. Paul A. Offit opines in his op-ed in The New York Times, “What Would Jesus Do About Measles?”
Measles is back in the United States because of a lack of herd immunity that has three sources: Nineteen states have philosophical exemptions to vaccination, 47 states have religious exemptions, and parents are not afraid of measles, according to Dr. Offit.
But Dr. Offit, a pediatrician who is chief of the division of infectious diseases and the director of the vaccine education center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said he is afraid of measles because he has seen what an outbreak can do. In the Philadelphia outbreak between October 1990 and June 1991, more than 1,400 people were infected with measles, and 9 children died. The outbreak centered around two fundamentalist Christian churches, the members of which did not vaccinate their children and did not take them to the hospital when they were infected. One-third of those who were infected during the outbreak belonged to one of the two churches and six of the nine children who died were members of the congregations, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report.
To read the entire article go to: The New York Times Feb. 10, 2015
Religious exemptions to vaccinations are a contradiction in terms and should be eliminated, Dr. Paul A. Offit opines in his op-ed in The New York Times, “What Would Jesus Do About Measles?”
Measles is back in the United States because of a lack of herd immunity that has three sources: Nineteen states have philosophical exemptions to vaccination, 47 states have religious exemptions, and parents are not afraid of measles, according to Dr. Offit.
But Dr. Offit, a pediatrician who is chief of the division of infectious diseases and the director of the vaccine education center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said he is afraid of measles because he has seen what an outbreak can do. In the Philadelphia outbreak between October 1990 and June 1991, more than 1,400 people were infected with measles, and 9 children died. The outbreak centered around two fundamentalist Christian churches, the members of which did not vaccinate their children and did not take them to the hospital when they were infected. One-third of those who were infected during the outbreak belonged to one of the two churches and six of the nine children who died were members of the congregations, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report.
To read the entire article go to: The New York Times Feb. 10, 2015
Religious exemptions to vaccinations are a contradiction in terms and should be eliminated, Dr. Paul A. Offit opines in his op-ed in The New York Times, “What Would Jesus Do About Measles?”
Measles is back in the United States because of a lack of herd immunity that has three sources: Nineteen states have philosophical exemptions to vaccination, 47 states have religious exemptions, and parents are not afraid of measles, according to Dr. Offit.
But Dr. Offit, a pediatrician who is chief of the division of infectious diseases and the director of the vaccine education center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said he is afraid of measles because he has seen what an outbreak can do. In the Philadelphia outbreak between October 1990 and June 1991, more than 1,400 people were infected with measles, and 9 children died. The outbreak centered around two fundamentalist Christian churches, the members of which did not vaccinate their children and did not take them to the hospital when they were infected. One-third of those who were infected during the outbreak belonged to one of the two churches and six of the nine children who died were members of the congregations, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report.
To read the entire article go to: The New York Times Feb. 10, 2015
Surgeon calls for mandatory vaccination
Measles vaccination must be mandatory, Dr. Robert Pearl asserted in an article in Forbes.
There is no effective treatment once children or adults contract measles; patients may experience high fevers and are at risk to develop bronchitis, secondary pneumonia, encephalitis, or hearing damage. They may die, said Dr. Pearl , a plastic and reconstructive surgeon who is CEO of The Permanente Medical Group.
Measles is extremely contagious; its airborne particles can remain infectious for up to 2 hours. Yet 19 states allow personal exemptions for vaccination.
Dr. Pearl stated, “As a society, we don’t condone behavior that puts others at risk for injury or death. There are no exemptions for laws that prohibit drunk driving, for example.
Refusing vaccination for reasons other than a serious medical condition is unfair and dangerous to those who can’t protect themselves. Those who remain unvaccinated pose a great risk to many, including: all children under 1 year old who are too young to be vaccinated, older adults who don’t know their immunity has lapsed, and others with impaired immune systems.”
To read the entire article, go to Forbes Feb. 5, 2015
Measles vaccination must be mandatory, Dr. Robert Pearl asserted in an article in Forbes.
There is no effective treatment once children or adults contract measles; patients may experience high fevers and are at risk to develop bronchitis, secondary pneumonia, encephalitis, or hearing damage. They may die, said Dr. Pearl , a plastic and reconstructive surgeon who is CEO of The Permanente Medical Group.
Measles is extremely contagious; its airborne particles can remain infectious for up to 2 hours. Yet 19 states allow personal exemptions for vaccination.
Dr. Pearl stated, “As a society, we don’t condone behavior that puts others at risk for injury or death. There are no exemptions for laws that prohibit drunk driving, for example.
Refusing vaccination for reasons other than a serious medical condition is unfair and dangerous to those who can’t protect themselves. Those who remain unvaccinated pose a great risk to many, including: all children under 1 year old who are too young to be vaccinated, older adults who don’t know their immunity has lapsed, and others with impaired immune systems.”
To read the entire article, go to Forbes Feb. 5, 2015
Measles vaccination must be mandatory, Dr. Robert Pearl asserted in an article in Forbes.
There is no effective treatment once children or adults contract measles; patients may experience high fevers and are at risk to develop bronchitis, secondary pneumonia, encephalitis, or hearing damage. They may die, said Dr. Pearl , a plastic and reconstructive surgeon who is CEO of The Permanente Medical Group.
Measles is extremely contagious; its airborne particles can remain infectious for up to 2 hours. Yet 19 states allow personal exemptions for vaccination.
Dr. Pearl stated, “As a society, we don’t condone behavior that puts others at risk for injury or death. There are no exemptions for laws that prohibit drunk driving, for example.
Refusing vaccination for reasons other than a serious medical condition is unfair and dangerous to those who can’t protect themselves. Those who remain unvaccinated pose a great risk to many, including: all children under 1 year old who are too young to be vaccinated, older adults who don’t know their immunity has lapsed, and others with impaired immune systems.”
To read the entire article, go to Forbes Feb. 5, 2015
NYU ethicist: Revoke licenses of antivaccination doctors
Physicians who espouse views based on anecdotes, myths, or ideology, especially in the middle of an epidemic, should have their medical licenses revoked, said Arthur L. Caplan, director of the division of medical ethics at New York University Langone Medical Center’s department of population health.
In a commentary about measles vaccination in The Washington Post, Mr. Caplan outlined in detail why three physicians who have made public their views against vaccination can and should lose their medical licenses, in his opinion.
A doctor is held to a higher standard than the average person, and “must consider the public health and the patient good in all that he says in his role as expert. To do otherwise ... is unprofessional. It might even constitute misconduct if it contributed to an epidemic. Counseling against vaccination is exactly that kind of misconduct,” he said.
To read the entire article, go to: The Washington Post, Feb. 7, 2015.
*Correction, 2/19/2015: An earlier version of this article carried a headline that misstated Dr. Kaplan’s profession.
Physicians who espouse views based on anecdotes, myths, or ideology, especially in the middle of an epidemic, should have their medical licenses revoked, said Arthur L. Caplan, director of the division of medical ethics at New York University Langone Medical Center’s department of population health.
In a commentary about measles vaccination in The Washington Post, Mr. Caplan outlined in detail why three physicians who have made public their views against vaccination can and should lose their medical licenses, in his opinion.
A doctor is held to a higher standard than the average person, and “must consider the public health and the patient good in all that he says in his role as expert. To do otherwise ... is unprofessional. It might even constitute misconduct if it contributed to an epidemic. Counseling against vaccination is exactly that kind of misconduct,” he said.
To read the entire article, go to: The Washington Post, Feb. 7, 2015.
*Correction, 2/19/2015: An earlier version of this article carried a headline that misstated Dr. Kaplan’s profession.
Physicians who espouse views based on anecdotes, myths, or ideology, especially in the middle of an epidemic, should have their medical licenses revoked, said Arthur L. Caplan, director of the division of medical ethics at New York University Langone Medical Center’s department of population health.
In a commentary about measles vaccination in The Washington Post, Mr. Caplan outlined in detail why three physicians who have made public their views against vaccination can and should lose their medical licenses, in his opinion.
A doctor is held to a higher standard than the average person, and “must consider the public health and the patient good in all that he says in his role as expert. To do otherwise ... is unprofessional. It might even constitute misconduct if it contributed to an epidemic. Counseling against vaccination is exactly that kind of misconduct,” he said.
To read the entire article, go to: The Washington Post, Feb. 7, 2015.
*Correction, 2/19/2015: An earlier version of this article carried a headline that misstated Dr. Kaplan’s profession.
Saying thank you to patients
I say “Thank you” a lot to patients. And I mean it.
I like being a doctor. It’s something I always wanted to do. For all the difficulties that go along with it, I still enjoy the actual job of caring for those who come to me. They’re the reason I’m here, and they keep my practice afloat and let me do what I want in life.
Like any other business, I have competitors. In my area, people have a choice of neurologists, and I appreciate that they picked me. So I always try to thank them when walking up to checkout.
A big part of what makes the job rewarding are those who feel the same way about me. It’s always nice when they thank me for helping, or trying to help, or just listening. I try to be a good doctor, so I’m glad to have someone recognize that. In this field, you can’t make everyone happy, but if I can have a solid majority who understand that I’m doing my best for them, I’ll take it.
I’m not fishing for compliments, or gifts, or a parade. Experience has taught me that patients who are overly flattering are most likely not to mean it. If someone calls me too many wonderful things, I immediately worry about their ulterior motives. Are they looking for narcotics? Disability? A legal action?
But a simple, sincere, “Thank you” from a patient can make it all worthwhile. Even on a bad day, it’s still a bright spot. It’s nice to know I’m making a difference. When I get a small note or appreciative Christmas card from a patient, I save it. They go in a drawer to be taken out and read after a particularly rough time, to remind myself that I must be doing something right.
Being appreciated reminds me why I’m here, and that this was the right choice for me. It lets me know that I’m doing what I set out to do many years ago: to help people.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
I say “Thank you” a lot to patients. And I mean it.
I like being a doctor. It’s something I always wanted to do. For all the difficulties that go along with it, I still enjoy the actual job of caring for those who come to me. They’re the reason I’m here, and they keep my practice afloat and let me do what I want in life.
Like any other business, I have competitors. In my area, people have a choice of neurologists, and I appreciate that they picked me. So I always try to thank them when walking up to checkout.
A big part of what makes the job rewarding are those who feel the same way about me. It’s always nice when they thank me for helping, or trying to help, or just listening. I try to be a good doctor, so I’m glad to have someone recognize that. In this field, you can’t make everyone happy, but if I can have a solid majority who understand that I’m doing my best for them, I’ll take it.
I’m not fishing for compliments, or gifts, or a parade. Experience has taught me that patients who are overly flattering are most likely not to mean it. If someone calls me too many wonderful things, I immediately worry about their ulterior motives. Are they looking for narcotics? Disability? A legal action?
But a simple, sincere, “Thank you” from a patient can make it all worthwhile. Even on a bad day, it’s still a bright spot. It’s nice to know I’m making a difference. When I get a small note or appreciative Christmas card from a patient, I save it. They go in a drawer to be taken out and read after a particularly rough time, to remind myself that I must be doing something right.
Being appreciated reminds me why I’m here, and that this was the right choice for me. It lets me know that I’m doing what I set out to do many years ago: to help people.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
I say “Thank you” a lot to patients. And I mean it.
I like being a doctor. It’s something I always wanted to do. For all the difficulties that go along with it, I still enjoy the actual job of caring for those who come to me. They’re the reason I’m here, and they keep my practice afloat and let me do what I want in life.
Like any other business, I have competitors. In my area, people have a choice of neurologists, and I appreciate that they picked me. So I always try to thank them when walking up to checkout.
A big part of what makes the job rewarding are those who feel the same way about me. It’s always nice when they thank me for helping, or trying to help, or just listening. I try to be a good doctor, so I’m glad to have someone recognize that. In this field, you can’t make everyone happy, but if I can have a solid majority who understand that I’m doing my best for them, I’ll take it.
I’m not fishing for compliments, or gifts, or a parade. Experience has taught me that patients who are overly flattering are most likely not to mean it. If someone calls me too many wonderful things, I immediately worry about their ulterior motives. Are they looking for narcotics? Disability? A legal action?
But a simple, sincere, “Thank you” from a patient can make it all worthwhile. Even on a bad day, it’s still a bright spot. It’s nice to know I’m making a difference. When I get a small note or appreciative Christmas card from a patient, I save it. They go in a drawer to be taken out and read after a particularly rough time, to remind myself that I must be doing something right.
Being appreciated reminds me why I’m here, and that this was the right choice for me. It lets me know that I’m doing what I set out to do many years ago: to help people.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
A mom-ent to comment
I read your Letters From Maine column entitled “A defining Mom-ent” with humor and, admittedly, a bit of disbelief. First, allow me to say, I am glad that in 2014, you are sharing and encouraging this mom-ent of awareness. I hope you will also allow me to say, “Really?! It is almost 2015” – (said with humor and exhaustion!)
I am a woman who also is a daughter, wife, parent of two children, pediatrician, and trustee on a foundation. I had the experience of having a pediatrician walk into my hospital room after delivering our youngest child, 4 years ago, and calling me “mother.” It was jarring. I thought to myself, “I am not your mother. Why are you calling me Mom?” I was so tired from having given birth that I did not have the energy to address the complete and utter amazement that term carried at that moment.
Later, it occurred to me that female pediatricians never referred to me as “Mom.” In fact, they referred to me by my name – such a welcome sound after being called everything but my name for days while I recovered from my cesarean section.
Really, what your column is about is that maybe male pediatricians are beginning to realize that assumptions some have made about how to address women who have added the additional facet of motherhood to their identity have known for a long time – we are more than what we do. Women who are physicians and mothers have been aware of this dynamic for a long time.
Kudos to you for being public about your realization and let it also be a call to all pediatricians to check their assumptions and how those assumptions are communicated through language. I think we should all be willing to humbly ask our patients, “What is your preferred name?” It is an icebreaker that imparts respect, humbleness, and kindness in one fell swoop. Thank you again for your thoughts.
Bernetta L. Avery, M.D.
Portland, Ore.
Dr. Wilkoff responds: Great e-mail. I like your suggestion of the icebreaker. I think with your advice I would (if I were still practicing) change my opening line to something like yours. I think it helps a lot of us do the best thing.
The beauty of motherhood
I just finished reading your article about calling a woman who recently delivered a baby, “Mom.” I appreciate that this is a common scenario for some pediatricians, although I have not had any issue with this and find it very disturbing. As a pediatrician, a wife, an active member of my community, and also a mom, I am happy being called any of those titles. I feel that our society has taken away the beauty of motherhood in so many ways – from politicians assuming that all women voters care about is reproductive rights, to now insulting someone by referring to her as “mom” right after she delivered a baby! She can be insulted all she wants, but the fact is, she is now a mom. And always will be! Very few women are “just” moms, but rather have other interests and skills beyond motherhood. But to assume that by us calling a new mother “Mom,” we are insulting them, is really an insult to motherhood everywhere. I will not change my practice of how I interact with families, but rather will celebrate with these new families and call them by their rightful new “names” – Mom and Dad.
Thank you for the article.
Kathryn M. Cambi, M.D.
Hamden, Conn.
Dr. Wilkoff responds: I received an e-mail from another mother/pediatrician (see above), who after the birth of her first child had a similar experience to the one I related in the column. Although she was troubled, it was not to the degree as the woman I referred to. She said that when she introduces herself, she asks the new mother how she would like to be addressed. I guess that is a reasonable approach, but I agree with you, it is sad that she feels that tip-toeing around the label of motherhood is necessary. I’m glad you are proud to wear the label of “Mom.”
Too lazy
I am a western New York pediatrician in my 25th year of practice, and I find your columns both interesting and down to earth. However, I think your “A defining Mom-ent” column misses an important point.
My path to medicine was circuitous, and I began medical school with a 5-year-old daughter, delivered my second child at the beginning of the third year of medical school, and my third child was born a week after finishing my residency. I was a “multifaceted” (as you say), although somewhat different individual at each of these deliveries, and at each one, I was referred to as “Mom” by a variety of medical personnel – nurses and physicians alike. Each time was uncomfortable, not because I felt my identity was not defined by motherhood alone, but because it appeared that either the individual using the title had been too lazy to check the chart for my name and/or because the use of that title by that individual seemed at best inappropriate and at worst condescending.
“Mom” is both a word and a title (hence capitalized when a title and not when used as a noun) and, as a title, has limited appropriate use. Only my daughters have the right to call me “Mom.”
I ask you, Dr. Wilkoff, how would you feel if the young check-out person at your grocery store concluded your transaction with, “Have a great day, Gramps.”?
Dolores C. Leonard, M.D. (also “Mom” and “Grandma” to select people)
Buffalo
Dr. Wilkoff responds: I received two previous letters from female pediatricians, one who shares your view and experience and one who is untroubled by the issue. I think your point about the inappropriate familiarity is spot on, but clearly the woman who wrote the original letter to the New York Times was having trouble with her identity, a problem that neither you nor the other responders to my column seem to share. Thanks for writing and thanks more for responding.
I read your Letters From Maine column entitled “A defining Mom-ent” with humor and, admittedly, a bit of disbelief. First, allow me to say, I am glad that in 2014, you are sharing and encouraging this mom-ent of awareness. I hope you will also allow me to say, “Really?! It is almost 2015” – (said with humor and exhaustion!)
I am a woman who also is a daughter, wife, parent of two children, pediatrician, and trustee on a foundation. I had the experience of having a pediatrician walk into my hospital room after delivering our youngest child, 4 years ago, and calling me “mother.” It was jarring. I thought to myself, “I am not your mother. Why are you calling me Mom?” I was so tired from having given birth that I did not have the energy to address the complete and utter amazement that term carried at that moment.
Later, it occurred to me that female pediatricians never referred to me as “Mom.” In fact, they referred to me by my name – such a welcome sound after being called everything but my name for days while I recovered from my cesarean section.
Really, what your column is about is that maybe male pediatricians are beginning to realize that assumptions some have made about how to address women who have added the additional facet of motherhood to their identity have known for a long time – we are more than what we do. Women who are physicians and mothers have been aware of this dynamic for a long time.
Kudos to you for being public about your realization and let it also be a call to all pediatricians to check their assumptions and how those assumptions are communicated through language. I think we should all be willing to humbly ask our patients, “What is your preferred name?” It is an icebreaker that imparts respect, humbleness, and kindness in one fell swoop. Thank you again for your thoughts.
Bernetta L. Avery, M.D.
Portland, Ore.
Dr. Wilkoff responds: Great e-mail. I like your suggestion of the icebreaker. I think with your advice I would (if I were still practicing) change my opening line to something like yours. I think it helps a lot of us do the best thing.
The beauty of motherhood
I just finished reading your article about calling a woman who recently delivered a baby, “Mom.” I appreciate that this is a common scenario for some pediatricians, although I have not had any issue with this and find it very disturbing. As a pediatrician, a wife, an active member of my community, and also a mom, I am happy being called any of those titles. I feel that our society has taken away the beauty of motherhood in so many ways – from politicians assuming that all women voters care about is reproductive rights, to now insulting someone by referring to her as “mom” right after she delivered a baby! She can be insulted all she wants, but the fact is, she is now a mom. And always will be! Very few women are “just” moms, but rather have other interests and skills beyond motherhood. But to assume that by us calling a new mother “Mom,” we are insulting them, is really an insult to motherhood everywhere. I will not change my practice of how I interact with families, but rather will celebrate with these new families and call them by their rightful new “names” – Mom and Dad.
Thank you for the article.
Kathryn M. Cambi, M.D.
Hamden, Conn.
Dr. Wilkoff responds: I received an e-mail from another mother/pediatrician (see above), who after the birth of her first child had a similar experience to the one I related in the column. Although she was troubled, it was not to the degree as the woman I referred to. She said that when she introduces herself, she asks the new mother how she would like to be addressed. I guess that is a reasonable approach, but I agree with you, it is sad that she feels that tip-toeing around the label of motherhood is necessary. I’m glad you are proud to wear the label of “Mom.”
Too lazy
I am a western New York pediatrician in my 25th year of practice, and I find your columns both interesting and down to earth. However, I think your “A defining Mom-ent” column misses an important point.
My path to medicine was circuitous, and I began medical school with a 5-year-old daughter, delivered my second child at the beginning of the third year of medical school, and my third child was born a week after finishing my residency. I was a “multifaceted” (as you say), although somewhat different individual at each of these deliveries, and at each one, I was referred to as “Mom” by a variety of medical personnel – nurses and physicians alike. Each time was uncomfortable, not because I felt my identity was not defined by motherhood alone, but because it appeared that either the individual using the title had been too lazy to check the chart for my name and/or because the use of that title by that individual seemed at best inappropriate and at worst condescending.
“Mom” is both a word and a title (hence capitalized when a title and not when used as a noun) and, as a title, has limited appropriate use. Only my daughters have the right to call me “Mom.”
I ask you, Dr. Wilkoff, how would you feel if the young check-out person at your grocery store concluded your transaction with, “Have a great day, Gramps.”?
Dolores C. Leonard, M.D. (also “Mom” and “Grandma” to select people)
Buffalo
Dr. Wilkoff responds: I received two previous letters from female pediatricians, one who shares your view and experience and one who is untroubled by the issue. I think your point about the inappropriate familiarity is spot on, but clearly the woman who wrote the original letter to the New York Times was having trouble with her identity, a problem that neither you nor the other responders to my column seem to share. Thanks for writing and thanks more for responding.
I read your Letters From Maine column entitled “A defining Mom-ent” with humor and, admittedly, a bit of disbelief. First, allow me to say, I am glad that in 2014, you are sharing and encouraging this mom-ent of awareness. I hope you will also allow me to say, “Really?! It is almost 2015” – (said with humor and exhaustion!)
I am a woman who also is a daughter, wife, parent of two children, pediatrician, and trustee on a foundation. I had the experience of having a pediatrician walk into my hospital room after delivering our youngest child, 4 years ago, and calling me “mother.” It was jarring. I thought to myself, “I am not your mother. Why are you calling me Mom?” I was so tired from having given birth that I did not have the energy to address the complete and utter amazement that term carried at that moment.
Later, it occurred to me that female pediatricians never referred to me as “Mom.” In fact, they referred to me by my name – such a welcome sound after being called everything but my name for days while I recovered from my cesarean section.
Really, what your column is about is that maybe male pediatricians are beginning to realize that assumptions some have made about how to address women who have added the additional facet of motherhood to their identity have known for a long time – we are more than what we do. Women who are physicians and mothers have been aware of this dynamic for a long time.
Kudos to you for being public about your realization and let it also be a call to all pediatricians to check their assumptions and how those assumptions are communicated through language. I think we should all be willing to humbly ask our patients, “What is your preferred name?” It is an icebreaker that imparts respect, humbleness, and kindness in one fell swoop. Thank you again for your thoughts.
Bernetta L. Avery, M.D.
Portland, Ore.
Dr. Wilkoff responds: Great e-mail. I like your suggestion of the icebreaker. I think with your advice I would (if I were still practicing) change my opening line to something like yours. I think it helps a lot of us do the best thing.
The beauty of motherhood
I just finished reading your article about calling a woman who recently delivered a baby, “Mom.” I appreciate that this is a common scenario for some pediatricians, although I have not had any issue with this and find it very disturbing. As a pediatrician, a wife, an active member of my community, and also a mom, I am happy being called any of those titles. I feel that our society has taken away the beauty of motherhood in so many ways – from politicians assuming that all women voters care about is reproductive rights, to now insulting someone by referring to her as “mom” right after she delivered a baby! She can be insulted all she wants, but the fact is, she is now a mom. And always will be! Very few women are “just” moms, but rather have other interests and skills beyond motherhood. But to assume that by us calling a new mother “Mom,” we are insulting them, is really an insult to motherhood everywhere. I will not change my practice of how I interact with families, but rather will celebrate with these new families and call them by their rightful new “names” – Mom and Dad.
Thank you for the article.
Kathryn M. Cambi, M.D.
Hamden, Conn.
Dr. Wilkoff responds: I received an e-mail from another mother/pediatrician (see above), who after the birth of her first child had a similar experience to the one I related in the column. Although she was troubled, it was not to the degree as the woman I referred to. She said that when she introduces herself, she asks the new mother how she would like to be addressed. I guess that is a reasonable approach, but I agree with you, it is sad that she feels that tip-toeing around the label of motherhood is necessary. I’m glad you are proud to wear the label of “Mom.”
Too lazy
I am a western New York pediatrician in my 25th year of practice, and I find your columns both interesting and down to earth. However, I think your “A defining Mom-ent” column misses an important point.
My path to medicine was circuitous, and I began medical school with a 5-year-old daughter, delivered my second child at the beginning of the third year of medical school, and my third child was born a week after finishing my residency. I was a “multifaceted” (as you say), although somewhat different individual at each of these deliveries, and at each one, I was referred to as “Mom” by a variety of medical personnel – nurses and physicians alike. Each time was uncomfortable, not because I felt my identity was not defined by motherhood alone, but because it appeared that either the individual using the title had been too lazy to check the chart for my name and/or because the use of that title by that individual seemed at best inappropriate and at worst condescending.
“Mom” is both a word and a title (hence capitalized when a title and not when used as a noun) and, as a title, has limited appropriate use. Only my daughters have the right to call me “Mom.”
I ask you, Dr. Wilkoff, how would you feel if the young check-out person at your grocery store concluded your transaction with, “Have a great day, Gramps.”?
Dolores C. Leonard, M.D. (also “Mom” and “Grandma” to select people)
Buffalo
Dr. Wilkoff responds: I received two previous letters from female pediatricians, one who shares your view and experience and one who is untroubled by the issue. I think your point about the inappropriate familiarity is spot on, but clearly the woman who wrote the original letter to the New York Times was having trouble with her identity, a problem that neither you nor the other responders to my column seem to share. Thanks for writing and thanks more for responding.
Fearful pictures
As the recent measles outbreak spreads out from its apparent epicenter at Disneyland Resorts in California, the media spotlights have again swung to the problem of underimmunization and the effect of vaccine refusal by parents. Because the statistics that are so alarming to us as pediatricians have little audience-grabbing appeal for print and electronic journalists, nearly every story about immunizations includes a picture of a young child screaming in pain and/or horror as he or she is receiving or is about to receive an injection.
In the Wall Street Journal, I was assaulted by one of the more egregious examples of this kind of inflammatory and fear-mongering photojournalism. The four-column-wide image depicts a cute 10- to 12-month old boy sitting in his mother’s lap encircled by her ample arms. He is grimacing, eyes puffed from crying as he is receives an injection in his left upper arm. You know he is about to shriek and the pacifier will fall out of his mouth. His mother is also grimacing, her teeth bared. Her eyes are clenched closed as she turns away from the horror.
The villain in this scene could be the young woman clothed in a lab coat and wearing blue plastic gloves. Of course, it isn’t much of a leap to believe that the real villain is the syringe and the vaccine it contains. A closer look at the image reveals the thumb of a gloved hand that is holding the little victim’s left leg. His puffy eyes suggest that this moment is the culmination of a long and unpleasant preamble.
Of course, the first and most important question we must ask is why does the media persist in using these anxiety-provoking images to embellish otherwise evenhanded and well-written stories about vaccine refusal? You might defend the journalists by pointing out that kids often cry when they get shots and that it is hard to find images of a contented child receiving an injection. Baloney!
I have just done a quick Google image search of “children receiving immunizations,” and what I found in scrolling down the first 45 photos of children receiving injections was that only five were crying – seven, in fact, were smiling! The rest had neutral facial expressions and body postures.
I saw a picture of the same white-coated injector in the New York Times. This time, the victim was girl about age 2 years, in full scream, sitting on her mother’s lap, her right arm pinned by her mother and an ungloved fully visible pink-printed grandmotherly assistant. The injector’s face revealed more than a trace of anxiety. Both these images were attributed to Getty Images and were probably from the same photo shoot. Obviously, the editors responsible for these stories hadn’t looked very hard for a photograph that might portray immunizations in a more-positive light.
Much has been written lately about religious and antiscience (or at least junk science) aspects of vaccine refusal. I don’t recall seeing much, if anything, said about just plain old needle fear. I suspect that many vaccine decliners are hiding (consciously or unconsciously) their fear of injections under the cloak of “intellectual” or religious choice. By continuing to use the kinds of fear-mongering images I have described, journalists are fueling the vaccine refusal debate.
How about you and I who provide immunizations on a regular basis adopt a policy of refusing to allow pictures from our offices to be taken immunizing uncooperative or terrified children? Or at least journalists should be forced publish three images of contented vaccine recipients for every photograph of a screaming child. Or, even better, how about a one-for-one arrangement that shows one child in the intensive care unit as the result of a vaccine-preventable illness for every crying injection recipient?
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” E-mail him at [email protected].
As the recent measles outbreak spreads out from its apparent epicenter at Disneyland Resorts in California, the media spotlights have again swung to the problem of underimmunization and the effect of vaccine refusal by parents. Because the statistics that are so alarming to us as pediatricians have little audience-grabbing appeal for print and electronic journalists, nearly every story about immunizations includes a picture of a young child screaming in pain and/or horror as he or she is receiving or is about to receive an injection.
In the Wall Street Journal, I was assaulted by one of the more egregious examples of this kind of inflammatory and fear-mongering photojournalism. The four-column-wide image depicts a cute 10- to 12-month old boy sitting in his mother’s lap encircled by her ample arms. He is grimacing, eyes puffed from crying as he is receives an injection in his left upper arm. You know he is about to shriek and the pacifier will fall out of his mouth. His mother is also grimacing, her teeth bared. Her eyes are clenched closed as she turns away from the horror.
The villain in this scene could be the young woman clothed in a lab coat and wearing blue plastic gloves. Of course, it isn’t much of a leap to believe that the real villain is the syringe and the vaccine it contains. A closer look at the image reveals the thumb of a gloved hand that is holding the little victim’s left leg. His puffy eyes suggest that this moment is the culmination of a long and unpleasant preamble.
Of course, the first and most important question we must ask is why does the media persist in using these anxiety-provoking images to embellish otherwise evenhanded and well-written stories about vaccine refusal? You might defend the journalists by pointing out that kids often cry when they get shots and that it is hard to find images of a contented child receiving an injection. Baloney!
I have just done a quick Google image search of “children receiving immunizations,” and what I found in scrolling down the first 45 photos of children receiving injections was that only five were crying – seven, in fact, were smiling! The rest had neutral facial expressions and body postures.
I saw a picture of the same white-coated injector in the New York Times. This time, the victim was girl about age 2 years, in full scream, sitting on her mother’s lap, her right arm pinned by her mother and an ungloved fully visible pink-printed grandmotherly assistant. The injector’s face revealed more than a trace of anxiety. Both these images were attributed to Getty Images and were probably from the same photo shoot. Obviously, the editors responsible for these stories hadn’t looked very hard for a photograph that might portray immunizations in a more-positive light.
Much has been written lately about religious and antiscience (or at least junk science) aspects of vaccine refusal. I don’t recall seeing much, if anything, said about just plain old needle fear. I suspect that many vaccine decliners are hiding (consciously or unconsciously) their fear of injections under the cloak of “intellectual” or religious choice. By continuing to use the kinds of fear-mongering images I have described, journalists are fueling the vaccine refusal debate.
How about you and I who provide immunizations on a regular basis adopt a policy of refusing to allow pictures from our offices to be taken immunizing uncooperative or terrified children? Or at least journalists should be forced publish three images of contented vaccine recipients for every photograph of a screaming child. Or, even better, how about a one-for-one arrangement that shows one child in the intensive care unit as the result of a vaccine-preventable illness for every crying injection recipient?
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” E-mail him at [email protected].
As the recent measles outbreak spreads out from its apparent epicenter at Disneyland Resorts in California, the media spotlights have again swung to the problem of underimmunization and the effect of vaccine refusal by parents. Because the statistics that are so alarming to us as pediatricians have little audience-grabbing appeal for print and electronic journalists, nearly every story about immunizations includes a picture of a young child screaming in pain and/or horror as he or she is receiving or is about to receive an injection.
In the Wall Street Journal, I was assaulted by one of the more egregious examples of this kind of inflammatory and fear-mongering photojournalism. The four-column-wide image depicts a cute 10- to 12-month old boy sitting in his mother’s lap encircled by her ample arms. He is grimacing, eyes puffed from crying as he is receives an injection in his left upper arm. You know he is about to shriek and the pacifier will fall out of his mouth. His mother is also grimacing, her teeth bared. Her eyes are clenched closed as she turns away from the horror.
The villain in this scene could be the young woman clothed in a lab coat and wearing blue plastic gloves. Of course, it isn’t much of a leap to believe that the real villain is the syringe and the vaccine it contains. A closer look at the image reveals the thumb of a gloved hand that is holding the little victim’s left leg. His puffy eyes suggest that this moment is the culmination of a long and unpleasant preamble.
Of course, the first and most important question we must ask is why does the media persist in using these anxiety-provoking images to embellish otherwise evenhanded and well-written stories about vaccine refusal? You might defend the journalists by pointing out that kids often cry when they get shots and that it is hard to find images of a contented child receiving an injection. Baloney!
I have just done a quick Google image search of “children receiving immunizations,” and what I found in scrolling down the first 45 photos of children receiving injections was that only five were crying – seven, in fact, were smiling! The rest had neutral facial expressions and body postures.
I saw a picture of the same white-coated injector in the New York Times. This time, the victim was girl about age 2 years, in full scream, sitting on her mother’s lap, her right arm pinned by her mother and an ungloved fully visible pink-printed grandmotherly assistant. The injector’s face revealed more than a trace of anxiety. Both these images were attributed to Getty Images and were probably from the same photo shoot. Obviously, the editors responsible for these stories hadn’t looked very hard for a photograph that might portray immunizations in a more-positive light.
Much has been written lately about religious and antiscience (or at least junk science) aspects of vaccine refusal. I don’t recall seeing much, if anything, said about just plain old needle fear. I suspect that many vaccine decliners are hiding (consciously or unconsciously) their fear of injections under the cloak of “intellectual” or religious choice. By continuing to use the kinds of fear-mongering images I have described, journalists are fueling the vaccine refusal debate.
How about you and I who provide immunizations on a regular basis adopt a policy of refusing to allow pictures from our offices to be taken immunizing uncooperative or terrified children? Or at least journalists should be forced publish three images of contented vaccine recipients for every photograph of a screaming child. Or, even better, how about a one-for-one arrangement that shows one child in the intensive care unit as the result of a vaccine-preventable illness for every crying injection recipient?
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” E-mail him at [email protected].
