| You can imagine, then, what a
blessed revelation it was to discover seasonal affective
disorder officially written up in DSM-IV. Now, I didn't
just feel crappy; I had a medical problem. Or at least a
psychological problem. And if I had a
medical/psychological problem, then I should expect, and
could expect, a medical/psychological solution. I was, in
fact, a victim. I don't know of whom or what I was a
victim--whether it was God for sending winter, or my boss
for making me work through winter, or my parents who
seemed to be responsible for anything that is wrong with
me, or whether I was a victim of simply--as my freshman
students used to write--"this modern world of today
in which we live now--currently--at this point in
time." But, by declaring victimhood and expecting
solutions from somebody else, somewhere, I could suddenly
become an object of pity, at least self-pity. And I could
expect, demand, that other people sympathize with me,
empathize with me, care for me, listen to me, love me.
After all, I was afflicted, with seasonal affective
disorder. I was SAD. (I have a friend, wife of a
lawyer, who was diagnosed with seasonal affective
disorder and sent off to a resort in Cozumel for the
month of January. I rather like that prescription, which
makes me rather like the diagnosis. Is it possible that I
could go hang out on a beach through the winter and,
instead of being a bum, I could be a patient, a
recovering victim? And might I even get it paid for by
some kind of health or disability insurance? The
possibilities boggle the imagination.)
Well, friends
and neighbors, having discovered seasonal affective
disorder and finding it a noble problem, I come to you
today as harbinger of a new ailment, one affecting many
of us in this room, affecting our respective professions,
and affecting the national body politic.
My new ailment,
discovered just in the last few days as I was writing
this speech, is called not seasonal affective disorder,
or SAD, but rather medical affective disorder, or MAD. It
is not yet in DSM-IV, but its appearance there is
inevitable in that it is such a useful malady. I commend
it to your thinking and to your care. Love this sickness.
Embrace this disorder. Draw this ailment, this malady, to
your breasts. Suck it in, inhale it, imbibe it. For,
verily, it will do you great good. If you are very
afflicted or very lucky, it might even yield you a
January in Cozumel.
And what is
medical affective disorder? It is, by definition (which I
made up, of course), "the distress, anger, dis-ease,
or dismay arising from the practice of, proximity to, or
perpetration of medicine." In lay terms, it is the
discovery that health care, which once looked so good as
a profession or a community service, feels like it is now
not only in the toilet but all the way to the outhouse.
(That's the way we talk in the Ozarks.) It is feeling
victimized, betrayed, impotent, frustrated in the face of
what has happened or what we think has happened, in
medicine during our short lifetime.
Like many
medical/psychological maladies, it is subject to some
ambiguity, and it may have different manifestations at
different phases of our lives. For example, a young
medical student may say, "I am just mad about
medicine," suggesting enthusiasm and interest, if
not enchantment, over a newly chosen profession. An older
clinician, making his or her way through the managed care
minefields, may say, "Practicing medicine today
makes me mad," indicating anger, hostility,
"I've had it." A hospital administrator may
say, "This whole cost containment thing drives me
mad," indicating incipient insanity--a
characteristic of many hospital administrators, we would
agree. The medical student is enthusiastic, the doc is
angry, the administrator is out of his ever-lovin' mind
frustrated. All are--or have--MAD. All are proper
examples of medical affective disorder.
Nor is the
disorder experienced just by those of us in this room. It
has become a national malady of gargantuan proportions--a
veritable epidemic of MAD has been let loose upon the
world through the dramatic, traumatic evolution--shall we
say revolution--in health care in our lifetime. Medical
affective disorder is a severe anxiety reaction that
afflicts the public at large as well as those of us who
are, in greater or lesser degrees,
"professionals" in health care, whether we be
clinical practitioners or administrators or concerned and
committed board members.
Causes of the
disorder are not difficult to trace. For the public, they
have to do with the sheer size of the health care
apparatus, its consequent depersonalization, the rising
dominance of technology in medicine, and the esoteric
quality of medical language. I'm sure there are other
elements contributing to the anxiety, which can be
summarized in the word change--monumental change,
rapid change, irreversible change, irrepressible change,
change that has left us breathless, reeling, in its wake.
Change always brings anxiety. How could there be anything
but anxiety--medical affective disorder--for a public
that has seen such gigantic and precipitous alterations
in that sector of life that affects our most intimate
selves--our bodies, our minds, life, death, sickness,
health, the well-being of ourselves and those we most
love--wives and husbands and children and parents and
grandparents. The public is frightened. The public has
MAD.
For
professionals, the anxieties are similar, created by
similar changes and affecting our livelihoods as well.
For example, you
are a physician. Your training was long, arduous,
expensive. In your internship and residency you served as
brilliant, highly educated slave labor. Setting up your
practice was incredibly costly, to say nothing of paying
off your loans. You endured it all, year after year after
year, because you could see great rewards "out
there," a brightly glowing light at the end of a
very long tunnel. You would get to practice medicine,
using your talents and skills to their ultimate degree.
You would do good for others; you would be a healer. You
would have independence, being self-employed, calling the
shots, controlling your schedules, being "free"
in every sense of the word. You would be respected in the
community. And you would make, not money, but MONEY: you
would have a large--maybe a very large--income, with all
the comfort and security and sense of well-being that
entails.
You believed
this because you saw it all happening with doctors you
observed. You had reasoned, reasonable, legitimate
expectations, based on direct observation. You expected a
certain lifestyle, and--ah, here's the rub--so did your
spouse. You anticipated, prepared, maybe even borrowed
with a certain reality in mind.
And suddenly,
with a rug-jerk, all changed, changed utterly. You are
not independent, free in your practice, but are hedged in
and dictated to and muscled over by all manners of
payors, investigators, systems, insurers, agencies,
bureaucracies. Your paperwork piles high, mountains of
forms and reports and administrivia that hide the view if
not the vision. Your income is good but nothing like you
expected. You are respected in the community but also suspected
as one of those rich doctors who are ripping us all off.
It is jarring.
You anticipated one kind of life, professional and
personal; you got another. Small wonder the Kansas
City Star on April 27 reported on docs'
unionizing--carrying union cards! Doctors! Small wonder
doctors of my generation relish the prospect of
retirement. As one physician friend told me, "While
I could still practice medicine, I loved it; when I
became an indentured servant to multiple bureaucracies at
half the income, I quit."
Physicians are
angry. Perhaps even you as a physician leader suffer from
some degree of medical affective disorder: you are MAD.
The same goes
for hospital administrators, who seek only to do good in
the community, and also well--that is, to make a decent
living for their families. Instead, they are hunted down,
harassed by investigators, indicted, convicted. It pains
us to see what happens to good people, especially when we
know them and know that they are good people.
Especially when we read that 4700 of America's 6000
hospitals are under investigation for fraud: 4700 of
6000, leaving only 1300 of 6000 not under investigation.
I submit to you that the hospital business simply does
not draw that many crooks into its ranks--there are much
easier ways to make money if one is intent on dishonesty.
It is therefore
not surprising if you as an executive should hunker down,
should manage defensively, should cover your personal and
institutional backsides, should write nothing, say
nothing, do nothing, think nothing, lest you be
vulnerable. Bold actions yield to fearful finger drumming
atop polished desks. Bold ideas yield to tired clich?s.
Bold visions yield to safe, pitiful little thoughtlets,
stripped down and neutered by prudent legal advisers,
turned into glossy pabulum by hopeful PR hacks.
Innovation is replaced by thick policy manuals. Dreams
are replaced by fears. It is once again the classic case
of the bland leading the bland. And good people who came
into hospital administration to do good work are
frustrated to the core of their being. Now you as
administrators are victims of medical affective disorder.
You are MAD.
It is the nature
of things in the hospital world of today in which we live
now, currently.
Not to be
tedious, but let me embroider this theme just a little
bit further to make the point.
Consider the
public, what we used to call the common man, when he, or
she, comes up against the sheer size and complexity and
(to him) the confusion of our modern health care system.
Picture in your mind a good ole boy from my old hometown
of Hardin, Missouri, down in the river bottoms (Hardin is
a suburb of Henrietta, out from Norborne, down the road
from Carrollton, across the river from Lexington, one
wagon greasing from Richmond--you get the picture). A
health problem rears its fearful head in ole Bill's
family--say his wife needs some kind of surgical
procedure, except to him it ain't no surgical procedure,
it's "a operation." And it is scary. Because
"the wife," as he calls her, is feeling
"poorly," as he says, he loads her up in the
pickup and hauls her to their family doc to see what they
should do. "Go to a specialist in Kansas City,"
the family doc says, which adds to their fears. If you're
from Hardin, you see specialists--or go to Kansas
City--only when you're about to die, and maybe not then.
The doctor sends ole Bill and the missus to a surgicenter,
I think he called it. What in damnation is that? Or to a tertiary
care facility. "It's not my tertiary that
needs care, it's my wife!" Then there is insurance
to think about--God, is there insurance to think about.
How are we gonna pay for this, when a hospital room costs
a lot more than a room in a mo-tel?
Bill's pickup
truck wheels into the parking lot of Research Medical
Center, say, and the first thing he finds is there's no
place to park. So he walks the wife a quarter of a mile
or so across the blacktop, comes into the front door of
the hospital, and from that point on he doesn't have a
clue. He stands for 30 minutes or so looking at the donor
wall, hoping it is a directory leading him to his doctor
or to some place where he can get help. He looks round
about himself, trying to appear cool, the way we looked
down in Hardin when we gathered in front of Dan Myer's
grocery store, kind of squatting on our heels, to chew,
or spit, or whittle, or cuss a little bit, or tell a
yarn, or if we were really talented to chew and spit and
whittle and cuss and tell a yarn all at the same time.
But it's hard to look cool when you don't know where
you're at and you need to find the specialist-doctor, but
all you can see around you is a gift shop, a chapel, a
caf?, an elevator, some restrooms, and a place to
pay--to pay for something you ain't even had yet. I'm
just trying to say that it is scary, because it is so
big, because it is so complicated, because nothing looks
right or sounds right or is easy.
And you don't
have to be good ole Bill from Hardin. You can be, like my
own family, Bob and Betty from suburban Blue Springs,
tooling in in your Jeep Cherokee, classy people who, when
we're planning a big night out for dinner, decide whether
it's going to be a place with a real waitres--that is,
Perkins--or a place with a microphone--that is, Sonic.
The health care system is equally confusing, because of
its hugeness and its complexity. Or let's say you are
Latasha, an African American mother who lives 6 blocks
from your hospital. Or J. Savvy Make-a-deal from the
high-rent suburbs, a corporate dasher, if not Dancer or
Prancer or Donner or Blitzen, who has never been sick a
day in his life and suddenly has chest pains and drives
himself or calls the wife off the golf links on his cell
phone, trying to get to your city's most fashionable
hospital: even if you are savvy and sophisticated, it is
hard to know what to do when suddenly your body stops
working right.
A large hospital
is a symbol of the whole health care system in that it is
a labyrinth, a maze, a place where you can't get lost
because you never were found in the first place. A doctor
is not a doctor anymore to the patient--what an apt word,
patient--but is instead a specialist, or a
subspecialist, or a sub-subspecialist--not a real doctor
at all, but a bone pinner or eyeball plucker.
And while the
patient is hurting, and confused, and frightened, and
wondering where to go and what to do, he believes in his
heart of hearts that these hospitals and doctors are
getting rich as skunks. So now the patient is not only
scared, he is disaffected. He has MAD with a vengeance.
Size is not the
primary villain. Worse is the inevitable
depersonalization that comes with size, a source of
enormous MAD when patients, clients, persons, are reduced
to being "cases," numbers, capitated heads.
When we, usually unwittingly and unintentionally,
gravitate toward treating diseases instead of people;
when patients, clients, persons, are reduced to feeling
like slabs of meat on an examination table; when people
become merely payors, or feel that they are, then medical
affective disorder becomes an epidemic.
Each of us has
his stories of depersonalization, as patient or as
professional. Wife Suzanne, in one of the hospitals I
serve in our Health Midwest system, first being quaintly
puzzled as an admitting clerk argued with her about what
her own--that is Suzanne's--name is, then lying in pain
after gallbladder surgery went bad, was told by a
well-meaning but insensitive technician who came to draw
blood, "You're my last stick of today." There
is more than a hint of depersonalization in being
anyone's "last stick of today," particularly
after having been assured that you don't even know your
own name. And Suzanne was, is, a young and healthy woman.
It gets much worse if you are an old guy like me.
Two summers ago,
for example, I--your obedient, humble servant--became a
patient in our system, a system I admire and promote and
serve and, on some days, love. It was a simple enough
thing, and it happens to many--I had helped a guy haul
his heavy fishing boat up onto the shore on the little
lake where we live and had felt a little twinge of strain
in my back. Well, you medical people know the story, and
a bunch of others in this crowd know it too. A couple of
days later I was in my office, leaned over to pick up a
single letter from the credenza, and lo, the death angel
struck. There was a pain in my left calf more
excruciating than anything I had ever felt in the history
of the world. My office is about 50 yards from Research
Hospital, and I was mentally calculating how I could call
the Research Eagle helicopter to airlift me across that
glacial space to the emergency room.
Now, old fart
Gordon, you have become a "case," a consumer,
even ultimately a payor, in the health care system. And
what a revelation it is!
With some very
notable exceptions from some very notable
individuals--precious to me in my mind and my memory are
those folks--I now became depersonalized, an object on a
conveyor belt that made its way through various doctors'
offices, various wings of a hospital, various facilities
in the corridors of those wings, all these offices and
clinics and facilities and labs having great difficulty
in communicating, though all were within easy walking
distance and certainly easy telephone or fax or Cerner
computer network distance of one another.
As an object on
that conveyor belt, a case, I observed a bewildering
thing. From the get go, I was denuded of any respect
normally accorded to representatives of God's highest
creation, us "humans merely being" as the poet
e e cummings calls us. Admitting clerks were the
worst in my brief experience (and I am sorry to say it in
that they are the first folks we meet in a hospital,
forming our first impressions). They were followed hard
after by assorted cheery-voiced women bobbing in and out
of examining rooms dressed in official hospital costumes
babbling baby talk at me.
I was treated as
if I were weak--which, of course, I was, being in
terrible pain. I was treated as consummately ignorant,
which I was, given the unfamiliar setting and the
unfamiliar language I was hearing. Medical language, so
necessary for scientific accuracy, also contributes to a
serious depersonalization when it is not explained. So,
for example, I was glibly told that I was to report to
the Pain Institute on the third floor of Research Medical
Center for an epidural. "What is an epidural?"
I blandly asked. "It is something we do for your
pain," came the clipped and somewhat annoyed
response. I wanted to know a wee bit more than that,
especially since I had sort of obliquely grasped the
possibility that someone might be playing a dart game on
my spine, so I look up the word epidural on a
CD-ROM in my little laptop, a disk that contains a
dictionary and an encyclopedia and God knows what other
lore. I waited expectantly--note that, expectantly--as
the disk whirred and the computer clicked and the answer
came up on the screen--a whole section of information on
childbirth. "Oh my God," said I. "I am
worse off than I thought. I am about to have a
baby." I was treated as ignorant, which I was. But I
was also treated as stupid, which I was not.
And, I was
treated as dependent. I think that is the rationale for
the aforementioned baby talk. I was weak, I was hobbling,
I was hurting, I was old, and therefore I presumably
could not understand any words unless they were in one
syllable and pronounced with a happy singsong nursery
rhyme sort of voice, usually chanted at me with the
pronoun "we": "How are we feeling
today?" "Now shall we get up on the
examining table and drop our drawers?" I
finally told one cheery soul that the only persons
entitled to call themselves we are God, a king, a
Siamese twin, or a man with a tapeworm.
I found myself
resorting to various mechanisms to try to offset the
depersonalization. I kept hearing the words of the poet
William Butler Yeats ringing in my head: "An aged
man is but a paltry thing . . . unless / Soul clap its
hands and sing. . . ." And so, quite deliberately, I
began to try to make my soul clap its hands and sing as I
went into examining room after x-ray room; after the MRI
lab; after the area labeled "Neurophysiology Lab:
EEG, EMG, Evoked Potential"; after the Pain
Institute; after the physical therapy room; after the
eternal, everlasting, infernal, ubiquitous admitting
room, and dressing rooms, and examining rooms. I found
myself "dressing up" to go to the doctor, on
the theory that if I were wearing a tie and a reasonably
well-tailored suit I might earn treatment as a more
mature and responsible person--not from the docs, let me
say again, who almost uniformly were good in their
handling of this patient--but from the harried, hurrying,
file-toting, spear carriers of the various hospital and
medical offices. I found myself trying to walk tall,
pulling myself up to my full glorious height, which is
less than impressive when you are 5'7", bald, and
hobbling. I found myself wishing for a full head of
shaggy hair, another half foot in height, a muscular
build, maybe the shedding of 30 years. It was not a
precious pride at work, at all; it was just wanting to be
a person, a human being, instead of a defective leg of
pig. I found myself calling out all the resources I could
muster in order to earn, even to demand, a modicum of
respect. I began name dropping, shamelessly, though I
agree with my friend Sir David G. T. Williams, former
vice chancellor of Cambridge University, who is fond of
saying, "I hate name droppers. As I was telling the
queen last week, it is terribly off-putting." I
would therefore let it be known that I knew, personally,
the big boss of our system. I knew the chairman of the
board. I knew the hospital administrator. I knew the
chaplain (that one didn't help). Ah--this one worked--I
knew the chief financial officer. I took to wearing my
badge as a Health Midwest vice president--we never wear
our badges, but I did when going to a hospital in quest
of further indignities. I made references to esteemed
physicians. I joked with those intent on perpetrating
atrocities upon my body. When confronted with the baby
talk, I used big words--and I know a lot of big words,
some of them all the way up to 3 syllables. I asked
questions about treatments. I made notes. I postured
being nonintimidated. And, the most effective tactic of
all--I treated my tormentors as persons, asking about
their training, asking about pictures on the credenza
behind the desk, asking about family members, letting the
costumed perps know I considered them real people and
silently, by implication, expected the same from them.
Some of the
tactics worked, except when I was committing the
unnatural perversion of lying near-naked on a moving slab
inside an MRI machine, impersonating toothpaste in a tube
with all sorts of clanking going on as your obedient,
humble servant was being squished. It was as weird as the
day an ophthalmologist--not one of ours--was humming
"Send in the Clowns" as he bent over me to
remove a cataract, with my plaintive whine, "Don't
forget me. I'm the clown who's down here on the
table" as his background music. I quite simply felt
no longer present and part of the proceedings, yet I had
the most to gain or lose from the whole operation.
Now factor in
the cost from my season as a patient in our system. The
bills began coming in, some of them seeming quite
reasonable for the skilled services that were provided.
Others seemed less than reasonable, as for example the
70-something dollars charged when a physical therapist--a
fine and helpful young woman--told me she didn't have any
instructions from the physician and she therefore could
not recommend any exercises or therapies, but I might
consider propping my leg up when I was sitting around
watching TV (the possibility of my going to work or
living some kind of reasonably active life that did not
include watching TV being apparently beyond her realm of
imagining). Seventy bucks to tell me she didn't have
anything to tell me but I might want to prop my leg up!
Hey, I could have figured that one out for zero bucks!
Total bills for this episode finally amounted to several
thousand dollars, almost all of which were paid by the 2
insurance programs that we carried. Though, as any
hospital or physicians involved would tell you, the
payments came very slowly. And several of those payments
came only when I--who have made a life commitment to the
cause of keeping insurance companies relatively honest in
my personal dealings with them--called, and called again,
and called again, and called again, following up on the
bills and the disposition of the bills by the insurer.
By the time one
has been in terrible pain, has bounced around from office
to office and clinic to clinic and lab to lab and
corridor to corridor and maze to maze and labyrinth to
labyrinth and baby-talking wench to baby-talking wench,
all the while being treated as a borderline imbecile; and
by the time one has been billed for this privilege at
least one-half the cost of a new Volkswagen Beetle; and
by the time one has dealt with the insurance company so
blankety-blank many times that me and that nice girl
assigned to my account are close friends and my wife and
her husband are both suspecting that we are more than
friends, so frequently am I calling her--by that time, I
tell you, you have an advanced case of medical affective
disorder. If you are not MAD, you ought to be.
And, I should
probably observe that I am scarcely a typical patient. I
work in a hospital system. I like these people and these
places. I admire what is done there and sell it to the
large philanthropic community with considerable zest and
joy in the work. I am reasonably literate and more than
reasonably educated. I am resilient, have some sense of
humor, and have a high tolerance for ambiguity. Take away
any of those qualities--the day-to-day contact with
health care, the education, the experience of life;
replace a sense of humor with fear, replace flexibility
with a black-and-white view of life, replace a kind of
graceful acceptance of what comes with a sense that I am
a victim of forces larger than me--and you have a truly
advanced case of MAD, with fury and anger running rampant
through our little universe.
Now--and I am,
mercifully, much closer to being finished than you
dream--I must observe once again that the same medical
affective disorder striking patients through the size and
complexity and depersonalization of health care in this
modern world of today in which we live now also affects
physicians, hospital administrators, board members,
medical care providers at every level, through the same
villainous qualities.
Doctors
themselves are subject to depersonalization nowadays, as
much so as the patients they serve. Once upon a time, a
boy or girl growing up and wanting to be a doctor thought
in human terms. You would some day set up an office, get
to know your patients and their families, look after
them, make things better for them. As a child you had
vague notions of specialties and knew that they were good
things, but your images were mainly those of the village
doctor. I remember a series of Peanuts cartoons in which
Charlie Brown decided he wanted to grow up and become a
doctor. But, he worried through one whole panel, he did
not want to be one of these specialist city doctors but
instead "a plain, humble country doctor," who
could be with the people and know them and care for them.
But, he fretted in the next day's strip, he did not want
to live in the country while he was being a country
doctor, and so he resolved that dilemma by deciding,
"I will live in the city in a fine house. And then
every morning I will get in my sports car and drive out
in the country and be a plain, humble country
doctor." But he fretted through the next day's panel
about the anonymity of a country doctor, deciding that he
would rather be famous than unknown. And he concluded the
series by saying, "I know what I'll do. I will
discover a cure for the common cold and become a plain,
humble, world-famous country doctor." And, Charlie
Brown concluded smilingly, "I'll be a regular M.
Deity."
In that simple
youth when many of us considered becoming doctors,
managed care had not been invented, or if it had it was
limited to some Kaiser industrial plant in some far-off
foreign land like California. Medicare and Medicaid did
not exist. In fact, the entire health insurance industry
had scarcely been devised. These factors, plus the better
science now done in medicine, plus the growth of the
population, plus daily advances in technology, plus
rising expectations of "consumers," have
changed everything. Now it is very difficult to be an M.
Diety, when the best one can hope for is to be one of the
archangels in a large group practice attached to a large
metropolitan hospital, being reimbursed at a fraction of
one's billings by a government agency or an insurance
company that is setting your rates. Maybe we had a
period of greed that led to these changes--probably we
did. Greed is one fairly predictable quality in the human
equation, as we all know. But can anyone doubt that the
tail is now wagging the dog when insurers pass the risk
off to coalitions of physicians, who did not train to be
insurance companies, who are not organized to be
insurance companies, and who should not be spending their
time becoming insurance companies. I want my doctor
taking care of my medical needs, not calculating the
actuarial probabilities or profit in this or that
capitated setting.
In some
instances, insurance companies have ceased to be
insurance companies and instead are trying to be money
collectors and distributors who pass the risk off onto
aggregated physicians' practices. They collect the money
while doctors and hospitals take the risk and do the
work. The word facilitator comes to mind, but only
in polite company. In other company, the word is pimp.
I do not mean to
be unduly harsh. Insurers have their own pressures in
this modern world of today. But certainly doctors are
squeezed as much as many, more than most.
So, doctors
become afflicted with, infected with, medical affective
disorder. Everywhere I go these days, doctors not only
have MAD, they are MAD. And that is a darn shame.
If all of us--as
doctors, patients, executives, board members--all of
us--suffer from MAD in greater or lesser degrees, if
dashed hopes and thwarted expectations yield MAD, if
legal pressures and bureaucratic demands yield MAD, if
depersonalization and loss of independence yield MAD, if
bigness of the health care system makes us feel smaller
and therefore yields MAD, if lessened income yields MAD,
if restrictions on how we can treat patients or operate
hospitals yield MAD, then the question of treatment
becomes paramount. The diagnosis is medical affective
disorder, MAD. What is the therapy, the cure? How do we
get hold of something that is an epidemic in our society,
first to contain it, then to heal it?
Let us first,
following good scientific practice, dismiss those things
that won't work.
Nostalgia
is one of those things. Many of us, perhaps all of us,
remember when things were different, and simpler, and
more human, and more humane, when doctors worked on a
fee-for-service basis and were widely respected
patriarchs of the community, when hospitals did not
advertise but just sat there being hospitals, and that
was enough, because when people needed this place of
refuge and sanctuary and hope they came on their own or
with the help of their doctor, with no billboard or
television ad or radio spot or sponsorship persuading
them to do so; when "running a hospital" was a
good job, a relatively straightforward job, that
qualified you as a bona fide "pillar of the
community" but did not tax your nights or weekends
as well as your days and did not rub your nerve ends raw
and did not jangle so hard against the secret places of
your soul that you began to find yourself waking up in
the dark of night asking, "Where did I put
myself?" "Where did I lose myself?"
Many of us,
maybe all of us, remember the simpler times, but the fact
is they will not come back again. You cannot stuff the
genie back into the bottle. You cannot shrink the
elephant. Where does an 800-pound gorilla sit? Where he
wants to sit. And the health care system is in fact an
800-pound gorilla that is going to keep sitting on our
heads if it wishes to do so, as it indeed does. "I
like it right here just fine," says he, picking his
simian teeth in our faces.
The simpler
times will never return. Nostalgia feels good, but it is
a false feeling good, a dream of what never was and will
never be. Nostalgia won't cure MAD.
Nor will wishing
cure medical affective disorder. We can wish the health
care system to be smaller, more personal, more humane,
more rational, more rewarding, more tractable, more
happy. But wishing doesn't make it so. It doesn't cure
MAD.
Even more
important, and more to the point, blame doesn't
cure MAD. In fact, it makes it worse. We have all seen
this phenomenon: stress strikes, which it seems to do
every day, and doctors blame hospital administrators.
Patients blame doctors. Board members get kind of starchy
with the executives who, after all, serve "at the
pleasure of the board," and the board is not feeling
much pleasure right now. Everybody blames the government
or the insurance companies. And if we can't find anyone
else to blame, we blame Bill Clinton or the lack of
profit sharing in major league baseball or, if you live
in Kansas City, Elvis Grbac.
There is a
short-term shot of adrenaline or something hot inside
ourselves when we blame others, and we somehow, by
blaming, can let ourselves escape responsibility, step
out of the center of the problem. But as my dear mother
used to say, "Whenever you are pointing one finger
at someone else, you are pointing three fingers back at
your own self." Blame doesn't work.
And despair
doesn't work. Shakespeare's Richard II says, as his
kingdom and life and hopes are crashing around him,
"Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of
the deaths of kings." Such despair creates nothing,
builds nothing, helps nothing, resolves nothing. It is
more a symptom than a solution of medical affective
disorder. Though I have known several physicians of
roughly my age who are looking toward retirement with
some pleasure and satisfaction in that they can see a
date when they are "out of this mess,"
believing so helps only that individual and not those who
are left in the system as it is.
Instead of
nostalgia, or wishing, or blame, or despair, the
treatment I would propose is radical--that is, "from
the roots"--and has less to do with changing the
system than it does with changing ourselves, our
attitudes, and consequently changing the things we look
at as crucial while we work within the system.
That is not to
say the system should not be changed: it should, and that
in substantial ways, and that every day. Our best minds
should be always at work correcting, improving,
adjusting, making better. It is like fixing our house so
it becomes a better house, a happier, more livable place,
more efficient, more usable, more beautiful. If we're
going to occupy it, let's make it the best it can
possibly be, even though it is consummately difficult to
build the house while living in it.
But, at the end
of the day, it is ourselves who are living in it,
and who we are matters more than what it
is. Any effective treatments for medical affective
disorder take us back to the roots of why we came into
medicine or health care in the first place.
Again, I refer
to our childhood and youth, our early and idealistic
professional years, when we came into health care with a
motive to serve, to help sick people get well, to help
healthy people stay healthy, to help individuals and
families, to help communities be better. We felt we could
make a living as doctors or administrators and of course
wanted to--the more the better--but the main motive for
many of us was to serve.
In that sense,
we were thinking toward a profession--not just a job, not
just a business, not just a role in society, but a
profession--where we have something to profess, something
to offer, something to advance, something to ameliorate,
something to improve. It was not just a job, but a
commitment--ourselves committed toward a worthy calling,
a calling out of ourselves and out of our selfishness and
out of our self-centeredness to do the good for other
human beings in a world marked by many kinds of
illnesses, individual and communal.
It is true of
physicians, who by definition and oath are called out of
themselves to heal others. It is true of hospital
administrators: the root idea of administration,
in fact, is to minister. The root meaning of executive
is to act, to execute, to do what is good for
persons and people and community. And it is true of board
members, who fill these roles not for personal
aggrandizement or personal gain but to serve, to do the
good.
Would you agree
to that? That our chief goals in health care are health
and care? It is so radically, stunningly simple:
"health care" consists of health and care.
But then most great truths are stunningly simple.
The fact of the
matter is, the bottom line is not the bottom line. The
financial bottom line is critical, to be sure. Without
positive results here, our work ceases to be. We close
the doors, turn out the lights, lock up the shop, put a
for sale sign in front of the property. We are done,
finished, gone, caput, history, toast. And as Big Daddy
says in Tennessee Williams' play Cat on a Hot Tin
Roof, "When you're gone from here, boy, you're
long gone and nowhere." Successful financial
performance is critical. But it is not fundamental. I
repeat it as if it were an incantation, a chant, a charm:
the true bottom line in health care is health, and
it is care. This is the bedrock, radical, from the
roots, basic, fundamental bottom line. Sick people get
well. Men and women die in comfort and dignity. Health is
sustained. Care is tendered. Communities are made better.
Families are comforted. Children are loved. I know this
is "soft" and easily sneered at in the
hardheaded "business world" of health care, the
hard-eyed science of medicine. Because it is soft talk
you can readily dismiss it as syrupy, mushy, irrelevant.
But soft is not always bad. The heart is soft, but it
pumps life. The brain is soft but is a seat of knowledge
and wisdom. It is okay to care for people, even in a
health care system.
The cure for
medical affective disorder, then--the solution for
MAD--is that we return to our first love, our first
principles, the things that first turned us into doctors
or called us to lead hospitals or lured us to hospital
boards. We return to our care for humanity, to those high
and noble motives that beckon us to live lives of greater
purpose.
Incidentally, of
course, this is great marketing. Watch patient
satisfaction ratings zoom up when somebody really cares
and lets a patient know that he or she cares. Watch
census go up when the word gets out that our hospitals
are caring places to be, existing for the well-being of
the patient and not the convenience of the staff. Let the
word get out that our boards and administrators really
care about people, are more interested in health than in
profits, and people will be beating down our doors. It is
great marketing. But that is incidental to doing right,
and being right, and living right, and creating the kind
of great institutions that serve society well because
they serve society nobly. This kind of worthy, selfless
focus bit by bit becomes the medicine for MAD in
ourselves and then, slowly, in the minds and loyalties of
those we seek to serve.
It works
something like this. When I was president of William
Jewell College, maybe 5 years or so into that work, I was
sure that we had painstakingly put the pieces of a great
college together--person by person, program by program,
plan by plan?and were now ready to take off. As a
college, we would soar, swoop, sail, mount up with wings
as eagles. We would become not just the best college in
Missouri and not just the best college in the Midwest and
not just the best college in America, but maybe the best
college in the whole wide world. We were ready! I was
ready!
Then, totally
unexpectedly and without any warning, the dream
unraveled. It happened the way it always happens: either
we don't step up to the challenge before us or someone we
are counting on very much does not deliver. And,
suddenly, we were not about to soar and swoop and sail,
but instead we were looking up to see bottom. It was a
terrible reversal of hopes and dreams and expectations. I
was angry, disappointed, frustrated. I had contracted the
collegiate equivalent of MAD.
Now what do you
do in a situation like that?
I had lots of
advice--Job never lacks for his comforters. Some said,
sympathetically, "Go talk to someone who would
understand." But that would be someone like Father
Weiss, president at Kansas City's Jesuit college, called
Rockhurst--I wasn't about to go tell the competition how
we had screwed up at William Jewell. Or they say, if you
are a religious person as I am, "Talk to God about
it." I thought about that, but I figured God had
never been a college president, and if he were he would
have fixed it by going "ZAP!" and I couldn't do
that. Or they say, "Go deep within yourself to your
own inner resources." I tried that, and it was just
one depressed person talking to another depressed person.
So, I did what
you are not supposed to do. I ran. I think psychologists
call it ?flight.? I boarded a plane for the west of
Ireland, where I love to go. I spent a time walking the
rugged, beautiful coasts, listening to the Atlantic crash
against the rocks, reading some great stuff, playing
badly on an Irish tin whistle, and trying to figure out
what to do.
One evening I
was in Gus O'Connell's Pub in the town of Doolin in
County Clare, where they say, "America is the next
parish west," listening to 3 young Irishmen play and
sing their music. I probably should not have been in a
pub, for I was president of a Baptist college and
Baptists have a very strict rule on drinking: They don't
do it in front of each other. In fact, when I got back to
campus and talked about the experience, I did not call it
a pub at all but rather used the Irish word shebeen,
whereupon a lovely southern lady, a member of the board
of trustees, asked me, "What is a shebeen,
Dr. Kingsley? Is that a beautiful Irish valley?'
"Yes, ma'am," said I, "a shebeen is
a beautiful Irish valley!"
I listened to
the 3 young men in Gus O'Connell's Pub, and in the course
of the evening, they sang an American folk song that you
may know:
Inch by inch
and row by row,
We're gonna make this garden grow.
All it takes is a rake and hoe,
And a piece of fertile ground.
Inch by inch
and row by row,
Someone bless these seeds I sow.
Someone warm them from below,
'Til the rains come tumbling down.
There it was,
and like a whack on the side of the head, I understood
all. I knew exactly how it worked, and I knew exactly
what I needed to do when I got back to the college and
the work there.
Look what the
song is saying. It says that never shall we, in a great
work, soar and swoop and sail, take off into the sky for
an easy victory. Always it will be hard work, darn hard
work and lots of it, to make progress a little bit at a
time--"Inch by inch and row by row." It is our
work--"We're gonna make this garden grow. / All it
takes is a rake and hoe"--our work that gets the job
done.
But not just
our work. There is also "a piece of fertile
ground"--that is, the gifts we have been given to
use in achieving our successes. They are our talents, our
education, our opportunities, our country, our families,
our hospitals, our system, our colleagues. We work hard,
but we do not work alone--the gifts of God are
everywhere.
And, further,
"Inch by inch and row by row / Someone bless these
seeds I sow. / Someone warm them from below / 'Til the
rains come tumbling down." This speaks of powers
larger than we are, beyond us, that help us in any noble
and good work. We cannot bless the seeds, but someone
does. We cannot warm them from below, but some powers,
forces, elements do. We cannot send the rain, but it
comes, through no act of our own.
We work hard. We
use the gifts that have been given us. And we accept the
help of the powers larger than all of us--our shared
efforts, our common vision, our mutual strengths, perhaps
God himself.
We don't need to
whine or whimper. We don't need to feel ripped off. We
don't need to feel as if we are victims. We can banish
medical affective disorder and all our anxiety and
frustration by placing our hand to the work, feeling the
gratitude for the gifts already given us, and being
available to the powerful good forces that can flow
through us for the good and health and healing of others.
We can do it.
The great philosopher Vince Lombardi said it best:
"We never lose! Sometimes the clock runs out on us,
but we . . . never . . . lose."
Thank you very
much.
|