TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
There's no shortage of military medical people. They'd just need to shift some postings. There are a great many military doctors stateside. In an emergency situation, civilian hospitals could take up their work (and engender a billing nightmare later) and free them up to go elsewhere.
Doubt
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2002
- Messages
- 8,106
The old way of getting doctors was to draft them just like the rest of the population. That was not a seperate draft.
I have heard nothing about a doctor shortage in Iraq. The military has always been a bit short on doctors, nurses, lawyers and clergy. All serve as officers and don’t have to go through the regular selection process and training. They receive what is known as direct commissions and go through special training courses after being commissioned. Although some nurses do go through ROTC anyway.
The easy way to get doctors into the army is to pay off their school loans. Not sure if they are doing that right now, but it is any easy way to recruit them. Also the military is a good place for some doctors to master their specialty. Orthopedic surgeons get lots of experience working in wartime or even in peacetime if they are stationed with airborne unit.
I have heard nothing about a doctor shortage in Iraq. The military has always been a bit short on doctors, nurses, lawyers and clergy. All serve as officers and don’t have to go through the regular selection process and training. They receive what is known as direct commissions and go through special training courses after being commissioned. Although some nurses do go through ROTC anyway.
The easy way to get doctors into the army is to pay off their school loans. Not sure if they are doing that right now, but it is any easy way to recruit them. Also the military is a good place for some doctors to master their specialty. Orthopedic surgeons get lots of experience working in wartime or even in peacetime if they are stationed with airborne unit.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Doubt said:
It's very common for a college graduate on his way to med school to join the military. The military pays the entire cost of medical school, he gets his MD, and in return he has an eight year or so commitment to stay in the military and be a doctor for them. Unfortunately, it means that the most experienced doctors fulfill their requirements and slip away to lucrative private civilian practice, leaving the military and their dependents with doctors at the start of their profession. Insert standard military medicine horror story here.
TragicMonkey said:
Civilian doctors and hospitals are already required to render care
to military personnel stateside if they participate in Tricare, not just for an emergency.
See for more information:
www.tricare.osd.mil/
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
materia3 said:
I know. And yet for some things military and dependents still have to schlep over to the military hospitals, or pay a lot more than Champus or Tricare will cover.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Patrick said:
If you haven't read the posts above this, it was pointed out that a draft of doctors isn't necessary. Guess someone needed to spell it out that if a draft of doctors is unnecessary, it would be unlikely to occur? Which is what the rumor was?
If you haven't read the posts above this, it was pointed out that a draft of doctors isn't necessary. Guess someone needed to spell it out that if a draft of doctors is unnecessary, it would be unlikely to occur? Which is what the rumor was?
Nice try. Your comment was a simple one about the current supply being adequate, which is not the same as directly questioning the draft rumor. Also, the original poster said there was a shortage in iraq, not the same as saying in the military - significant at a time when many reservists (including undoubtedly many doctors) are leaving because they don't want to be in iraq.
Nice try. Your comment was a simple one about the current supply being adequate, which is not the same as directly questioning the draft rumor. Also, the original poster said there was a shortage in iraq, not the same as saying in the military - significant at a time when many reservists (including undoubtedly many doctors) are leaving because they don't want to be in iraq.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Patrick said:
Sorry, Patrick. I didn't spell it out very clearly. My thinking was that since there is no shortage of military medicos worldwide, that a draft of doctors would be unnecessary since it would be far simpler to post some of the current crop to Iraq than to collect more. I figured that was implied, but of course not everyone thinks in the same way.
And reservists aren't leaving: they're under stop-loss. Doctors or otherwise, people aren't getting out of the military at will at the moment. And even when there's not a stop-loss, the people mentioned above who received their medical training at military expense are very much required to fulfill their obligations.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
geni said:
And the question has been derailed. Sorry!
Well if you bother to read the opening post you will see it was asking about the technicalities of doing this rather than weather it would in fact happen.
Another nice try!
The opening was a simple statement of the rumor, with no follow up comments like "Can this be true? Anybody got any information on this?" . The follow up questions were the technical detail questions.
Another nice try!
The opening was a simple statement of the rumor, with no follow up comments like "Can this be true? Anybody got any information on this?" . The follow up questions were the technical detail questions.Sorry, Patrick. I didn't spell it out very clearly. My thinking was that since there is no shortage of military medicos worldwide, that a draft of doctors would be unnecessary
OK - well and good. But note the difference in the "skepticism level" of my post and this one - you REALLY want to claim there is a uniform level of skepticism for both Lurch and Bush here? C'mon.
OK - well and good. But note the difference in the "skepticism level" of my post and this one - you REALLY want to claim there is a uniform level of skepticism for both Lurch and Bush here? C'mon.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Patrick said:
This is my last post in this thread because I'm helping derail it with this pointless bickering.
Patrick, there is a disparity in the response between the two for several reasons. The most important is that your rumor is much more absurd than this one.
TragicMonkey said:
I can't speak for the whole country obviously but any Tricare provider must take every Tricare military and dependent and do so at the allowed rate per service and not charge the Champus or Tricare client anything extra above what the plan pays. If personnel and dependents are paying out of pocket it is probably because they want to or want to see a non-Tricare povider. This happens with any insurance plan, however.
Actually it is specialist services that are provided by the very best civilian specialists that military or dependents must "schlep" to just like any civilian patient. For adult and pediatric primary care and gyn, government doctors can usually be found nearby.
And yes, if for example the Tricare civilian specialist decides the patient needs a CAT scan then the patint is asked to have it done at a military or VA facility rather than in a private or commercial one. While the govenment facility will do it for less (actually for nothing), a commercial or private provider may charge a thousand dollars. Having to travel for high priced procedures which can be "bought" for less is nothing new either and a reasonable distance must be involved or Tricare will pay for the nearest place to have such a procedure done.
When it comes to health care delivery and cost it is not a perfect world.