Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

question everything

(47,645 posts)
Mon Aug 12, 2019, 02:38 PM Aug 2019

What the AMA Stands For Now

Under a new president, Patrice Harris, the American Medical Association made a splash in the reproductive-rights debate in June by suing North Dakota to block two abortion-related laws. One of those laws requires physicians to tell patients that medication-induced abortions can be reversed in some instances, which the suit says is false; the other requires doctors to tell patients that an abortion terminates “the life of a whole, separate, unique living human being.”

The AMA also has recently taken positions on some topics, such as climate change and body-worn cameras in law enforcement, that aren’t traditionally associated with medicine. Dr. Harris, who will serve a one-year term as president, spoke to The Wall Street Journal about the AMA’s advocacy efforts, health-care reform and diversity in the profession. Edited excerpts follow.

WSJ: The AMA recently filed a lawsuit against North Dakota over two abortion-related laws, one of which you previously said contradicts reality and science. How did you make the decision to sue?

DR. HARRIS: There has been a proliferation of laws over the last year or so that really get to the heart of the matter of government intrusion into the patient-physician relationship. The AMA always has and always will condemn any interference into the patient-physician relationship, because we believe that that would negatively impact care. Also, in North Dakota, one of those laws compelled physicians to repeat information that was not science-based and not evidence-based. So you have two issues: governmental interference into what medical advice or what treatment alternatives are discussed with patients, and then that advice is not science-based and evidence-based.

WSJ: What has the response to this decision been like from physicians both in and outside of your membership?

DR. HARRIS: Based on the email and the communications that I received, it’s been positive. There’s a unifying position out there that there should be no interference with the doctor-patient relationship. I have not found a physician who disagrees on the critical ability of physicians to be able to talk openly and honestly and give science-based information to our patients without any interference.

More..

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-the-ama-stands-for-now-11565575501 (paid subscription)





1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What the AMA Stands For Now (Original Post) question everything Aug 2019 OP
They have had decades of cowardice, so I DO see this as hopeful change. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #1

Kick in to the DU tip jar?

This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.

As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.

Tell me more...

Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»What the AMA Stands For N...