Politicians have a knack for passing feel-good legislation which on the surface appears to solve a problem but in reality ends up causing more harm than good.
Such is the case with the Massachusetts “gift ban” as it relates to the pharmaceutical industry’s relationship with physicians.
The legislation fails on at least two counts: 1. It makes a broad assumption that physicians are susceptible to unethical conduct in terms of patient care on account of a relationship with industry 2. A fundamental reason many supported the law is the impact it would have in controlling health care costs
Kate Atkinson, a primary care physician, addresses both those points and also explains how this law has actually harmed physicians:
Since our State enacted its “gift ban,” we have been unable to find a sponsor for our meetings. The medical society outright declined our request because our meetings were not considered sufficiently inclusive (i.e., females only). Post-“ban” we have limped along paying our own way but the truth is medical practice is demanding and chaotic for us all, and possibly even more so for women with families – the logistics alone have stymied us. We are not close to an academic teaching hospital and even our community hospital is a 40-minute drive for me and many of my colleagues. Therefore, there are no other resources of this quality and nature in our community. And if we tried to host the meetings in our homes our family members would pose a distraction. A once staunchly loyal group of 15-20 now often sees 5-6 women attending.
Read Dr. Atkinson’s full piece here.
