I find myself wondering what would happen if you just showed up and stated, quite clearly, that you do not consent to having your blood drawn. You simply refuse, and that should be the end of it. As far as I am aware, there is no regulation stating that you are obligated to permit invasive medical procedures.
Kevin White5 said:I should probably mention what my future looks like in Washington, D.C. After my residency year, I’ll likely be looking at two or three years of being a fresh face on the scene before I even get a fellowship. As for the pay—$1500well, certainly not high. And after that, there's the hope of a funded fellowship, $1600assuming I actually land one.
The reality is that many people never secure a specialized fellowship at all. Furthermore, many don't end up working in Washington, D.C.; instead, people born in the capital often find themselves moving far away to small towns just to find work, living separated from their friends and parents for the sake of a career.
Kevin White5 said:Sometimes I wonder if I'm losing my mind, but there's nowhere I feel more at home than in America. It truly hurts when our own people speak ill of doctors, because there are so many who are genuinely extraordinary and good—individuals who aren't corrupt and who work far beyond what is required, yet they don't earn anything remotely close to a politician or a respected scientist.
Look, physicians in America are essentially government employees in certain sectors, and they are compensated accordingly. I left the US to find better opportunities, and I'm not going around complaining that society is unfair just because they didn't reward my brilliance with mountains of cash. They paid me exactly what my profession is worth here in America. You want to live in your favorite city and you want to earn a massive salary? You have to decide which matters more to you. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
No one is stopping you from attempting to open your own private practice, but that comes with risks and requires significant capital, much like any other business. If your goal is to work within the hospital system and make serious money, then specialize in something, pass the USMLE, and head over there to grind day and night for a high paycheck.
And please, let's not drone on about how scientists deserve state funding simply because they spent years in school. That doesn't exist in a market economy; that's pure communism. I know plenty of cases where doctors in America have behaved in ways that were beneath human dignity, to say nothing of the Hippocratic Oath and similar fantasies. The root cause of justifying corruption seems to be that people believe they deserve more, failing to realize they are just thieves if they steal.
That’s a fair point, doc. Regarding the distinction between suspects and defendants, I believe someone is considered a suspect when the police are still investigating who is actually responsible, whereas they become a defendant once they face charges in court. For instance, Jack Tbrosjek might be a suspect in the deaths of four women, while Tom Lightfinger is a defendant facing charges for defaming the Count of Monte Cristo in his latest financial column. It isn't in dispute that Tom wrote the article; the issue is whether he committed libel.
As for the reality of the system: yes, I am well aware that far too much responsibility has been dumped onto the shoulders of medical staff, but I highly doubt the system will organize itself effectively anytime soon. Quite simply, there are far too many political appointees in charge for anyone to steer this ship back on course. Something will have to explode quite violently before we see any meaningful change.
Kevin White5 said:A thief is a thief, but they aren't a killer. Take that doctor here who was caught taking bribes; his face was splashed across every newspaper and his full name was published BEFORE he even stood trial! It puts him in the same category as that kid who killed two girls while driving a BMW at 200 km/h—for him, the papers only printed initials. We don't even know what he looks like. He didn't spend a single day in jail, and now he’s just studying abroad and living a perfectly normal life. Is that what you call justice? Please.
I am not defending any doctor, nor do I approve of bribery in any form, but I truly believe there is no reason to parade someone through the tabloids WHILE THE COURT HAS NOT REACHED A VERDICT.
IF SOMEONE NEEDS TO CONDEMN THAT DOCTOR, then let it be the medical professionals and the judiciary, and only after guilt has been proven.
What are you looking for? There are laws in America where journalists have successfully sued for defamation; guilty doctors can certainly try.
The guy who ran over those two girls and got away with it is a perfect example of how "justice" works within the American judiciary: he successfully bribed a judge. That’s how the system functions, and that is precisely why it’s such a headache for the EU, because our courts are riddled with corruption and political influence (just look at that case from Boise where a man assaulted a basketball player, and the judge ruled his finger in her anatomy was basically just a handshake).
In principle, you're right; the media does exaggerate, but I think it's just a reflection of the sheer resentment toward healthcare corruption, which, in my opinion, is deeply deserved on the part of certain doctors.
Kevin White5 said:Furthermore, in France, you wait three to six months for an appointment unless, of course, the check-up isn't urgent. We are talking about clinical hospitals here. The only difference is that the patient knows exactly the date and time they were scheduled for.
That sounds horrific. That isn't normal, and it shouldn't be a model to follow. For instance, I came in for an appointment today here in Germany that I booked via phone just two days ago—nothing urgent at all—and I received all my test results almost instantly. If anyone had told me I’d have to wait three weeks, I would have laughed and walked out.
Kevin White5 said:I'm sick of the US because they just let people without insurance die on the street. Please, don't even go there. And what am I supposed to do about the fact that things are so expensive in the US? Medicine there is a business; a top-tier surgeon can pull in millions of dollars a year. Honestly, I wouldn't even debate this, because good medicine should ensure basic care is available to EVERYONE.
It isn't true that they just let people die on the street; emergency services will pick up anyone, though depending on their insurance, they might end up at different hospitals. Everyone will receive basic assistance. Top-tier US hospitals are undoubtedly world-class, and I see no issue with allowing those who have the funds to pay for premium private treatment. It is far more honorable than being corrupt while working for the state—stealing from the government and the insured, or extorting people when they are in pain or near death. The poor get basic services, but it is more honest to admit that is the reality rather than lying and saying everything is accessible to everyone, only for you to realize that when something is actually needed, it requires a direct payment to the surgeon in a blue envelope under the table.
Exactly. To be honest, I find hospitals absolutely draining—they just depress me. Beyond the mood, I’m convinced there’s this inherent tendency for medical staff to simply use whatever equipment happens to be within arm's reach. It’s like, if they have a needle handy, they’re going to stick you with it, not necessarily because it’s the best course of action, but simply because the needle is right there. I realize I might be exaggerating a bit, but lying in a hospital bed feels incredibly traumatic to me; it honestly feels more like being in a prison cell. I lose my appetite, I lose any desire to interact with people, and frankly, I even lose my will to live. I can handle a brief stay if it's absolutely necessary, like for a quick surgery where I might stay overnight just to let the anesthesia wear off, but after that, I'm out. The idea of staying through a whole weekend just so someone can tell me on Monday that everything looks fine? No thank you. Not in a million years.
Kevin White5 said:And this whole situation currently unfolding with MIT... honestly, it’s just one thing after another.🙏What are your thoughts on this? $500 So, some doctor went and took a bribe. Look, I know how this works—it’s wrong, plain and simple, and it’s something that just shouldn't happen in a civilized society. But honestly, you have to look at the bigger picture here. We see these massive sums of money being funneled away right under our noses. You watch these politicians pocketing millions in taxpayer dollars through corruption and backroom deals, and yet we barely even blink. It feels like we're focusing on one small transgression while the real theft is happening at the highest levels of government.
Is the argument that politicians steal so much that doctors stealing a little less is somehow valid? I really have to ask: where are your principles? A thief is a thief, regardless of the scale of the theft. In my view, it’s actually worse when someone steals the very last crust of bread from a person in need than when someone swipes half the fortune of a billionaire.
Kevin White5 said:I was just sitting here thinking about how absurdly expensive things have become lately. I actually just paid a staggering $30 for a full year of liability, medical, and professional insurance while traveling through France. It feels like every little thing requires a premium these days, doesn't it?
You’re lucky. If you actually moved to the States, you’d see firsthand what the market rate for malpractice insurance looks like. You could take that twenty-seven dollar figure of yours and add at least three zeros to the end of it—and honestly, depending on your specific specialty or even just which city you settle in, it could be even higher than that. It seems to me that in France, either the government is heavily subsidizing those costs, or their legal system simply doesn't allow for these kinds of lawsuits regarding medical negligence.
Kevin White5 Zachary Thompson9 said:In this country, there’s a pervasive, almost unshakable belief that doctors are infallible. People tend to act as if a medical error is a sign of fundamental incompetence rather than a tragic reality of human nature. Now, don't get me wrong—I am fully aware that mistakes in the healthcare system can be absolutely fatal, and we should certainly be working tirelessly to minimize them through better protocols and oversight. But we have to face the facts: errors happen. They are a part of the landscape. Instead of immediately calling for a doctor to be crucified in the court of public opinion, I believe we need to adopt a more balanced perspective. We should strive for excellence, yes, but we must also accept the fallibility of the individuals providing our care without jumping straight to total condemnation.
On the other hand, when mistakes happen purely because of negligence, I truly believe that doctor deserves to be crucified on a pillar of shame. Honestly, they deserve the gallows. If you kill someone through sheer laziness or total carelessness, there should be consequences. Just look at those cases where pregnant women lose their lives simply because the doctor on call decided to take a nap or was too preoccupied watching a football game to bother responding to an emergency. It’s those endless little instances of incompetence: making sloppy incisions, failing to wait for anesthesia to actually kick in, or just being plain disrespectful—even refusing to administer anesthesia because they simply can't be bothered.
There is a fundamental distinction that we need to make when discussing liability. When an error occurs despite someone exercising genuine, conscientious care, that is simply a mistake. It should be handled through insurance, just like any other unforeseen accident. However, when an error stems from pure negligence or a blatant lack of professionalism, we aren't talking about an accident anymore. At that point, it becomes a crime. Such actions should be prosecuted and penalized accordingly.
Kevin White5 said:In all the wealthier Western countries, you have to wait three to six months just for an appointment!!!! We Americans are used to getting treatment RIGHT NOW. That should only apply to emergencies; for anything else, it shouldn't. If someone wants that kind of priority, they can go private or pay extra through insurance.
That isn't quite right. I live in one of those "Western" areas. I know for a fact that I can get any exam I need—whether it’s an MRI, a CT scan, or anything else—within a matter of days. I call around, find whoever has an opening, schedule the appointment, and I'm there within a few days.
The issue with waiting isn't just capacity; it's that here in America, the system allows backlogs to build up unnecessarily. If demand actually exceeded the capacity for exams, wait times would rise naturally, but this feels more like a deliberate choice. It seems like it serves certain interests to keep people on a waiting list; the longer you wait, the more desperate you become, which increases the likelihood that someone will pay a premium to be seen immediately. It is both inhumane and greedy.
Kevin White5 said:That’s why bribery and corruption exist, and honestly, the patient shares some blame because they encourage it by paying to jump the line. We are constantly comparing ourselves to "the West," but in this one specific area, we are NOT the same. You can't just generalize like that.
Comparing everything to "the West" is a lazy argument. People always find these ridiculous justifications for "the West," ignoring the fact that it isn't some monolithic entity. There are massive differences. Just compare the healthcare system in the United Kingdom to the one in Germany, and you'll see they aren't even remotely alike. Yet, certain people insist on spinning these fairy tales about how "the West" operates. When it comes to corruption, the patient is an exception, not the rule. They don't pay bribes because they are malicious; they pay because their life or health is at stake. They are suffering, and no one is helping them, yet many people suggest—directly or indirectly—that help is available if they pay up. What is it humanly possible to expect from someone in pain? Of course they will pay. But in cases of medical bribery, the responsibility lies entirely with the doctor, who intentionally puts the patient in a position where they have to choose: pay a bribe or receive no care. The fault lies with a system that treats bribing doctors as a standard practice, starting from small favors for nurses and moving upward.
Just look at that case involving a cardiac surgeon from Cleveland, telling a sick man that "death won't be that painful" and that he has no chance of being seen in time. That isn't the language of a compassionate person; it is the marketing tactic of a scoundrel who steals from both the state and people on their deathbeds. For individuals like that, we should implement much harsher prison sentences. This isn't merely theft or corruption; it is the most despicable form of extortion.
Lisa Rodriguez84 said:I feel like I should frame this as a joke, but when you actually stop to think about it, there isn't anything funny about it: We really ought to put signs on our hospitals that say "Enter at your own risk," rather than just having warnings about leaving without a doctor's permission... Don't you think?
It’s a sad reality, but you make a valid point. If something truly serious happens to you, all this nonsense regarding liability doesn't change much. In an American hospital setting, there is a very real chance that someone could cause you harm, and they would likely face zero accountability for it.
When it comes to leaving against medical advice, sure, they can be upset with you, but from what I understand, legally they can't deny you emergency treatment at another facility—or even within the same one—which is the only part of this that feels right.
I have to disagree with the notion that there is a shortage of personnel. If you look at any major medical school in the country, they still have more applicants than available seats. While it’s true that interest is trending downward, there are still plenty of candidates entering the field. The real issue facing our healthcare system isn't a lack of medical staff; rather, it is a fundamentally broken and corrupt system.
And I am not just talking about those unscrupulous surgeons who solicit bribes for procedures. I am also referring to the egregious misappropriations occurring within government agencies and hospital administrations during the procurement of equipment and large-scale investments—areas where massive amounts of money are being funneled.
The core problem lies in a certain mindset that grants doctors absolute power, operating under the assumption that they are untouchable within a hospital setting because someone will always bail them out. The reality is much simpler: if the body fails, no amount of technology can intervene.
We also face a crisis of motivation among staff. There is a widespread perception that they are working incredibly hard for meager pay, which is exacerbated by administrators who are clearly skimming off the top. This leaves the frontline workers struggling for pennies—unless, of course, they decide to follow suit by engaging in theft or extortion themselves, leading to a complete "race to the bottom."
Furthermore, there is an arrogance present in some practitioners who expect patients to simply hurry up and endure their treatment. They fail to recognize that patients are intelligent beings capable of feeling pain. Any attempt by a patient to ask questions or participate in deciding their own treatment plan is often met with hostility, as if it were a personal attack on the doctor's authority.
It is also true that some physicians are overextended. However, instead of hiring additional teams to utilize existing equipment 24/7—which would clear backlogs and eliminate waiting times—people simply lament that we need to build more hospitals. It is far easier to demand more taxpayer funding from the federal government than it is to actually reorganize the current structure.
There is a lack of healthy rapport between doctors and patients, the regulations are poorly designed, and there is a profound lack of accountability for medical errors (where a surgeon's "unfortunate complication" remains a common excuse).
The solution to these problems does not involve throwing more money into the black hole of the medical system or continuing the historical trend of coddling doctors.
placidpanther12 said:I once drove my doctor absolutely insane with so much talking that I actually begged to be discharged three days early against medical advice just so I could go home. Then, when I finally ended up in the ER, they completely screwed me over on every possible level.
Who exactly screwed you over? You should sue them for malpractice, report them to the hospital board, or just give them a taste of their own medicine. Honestly, would you feel any differently if you were actually staying in the hospital bed? What’s really the difference here? It mostly comes down to how fast the paramedics arrive, a single ambulance ride, and keeping the hospital bills a bit lower.
My perspective is this: suppose you're in the hospital, the doctor tells you that you aren't doing well, but you've simply had enough. You pack your bags, tell the nurse on the floor, "I'm out of here, bye," and even if she insists you sign some paperwork because you aren't supposed to leave yet, you just ignore her. You walk right out the door, grab an Uber, and head home. Who can stop you? You left the hospital of your own volition. If you start feeling terrible again, you can always come back—either to that facility or to a different one entirely. At the end of the day, we have to ask ourselves: is a hospital meant to be a place of healing, or is it a prison?
Lawrence Doyle56 said:This might be a bit off-topic, but I was actually discharged from the hospital this past Monday. They told me to come back on Thursday to pick up my discharge papers, and sure enough, the paperwork was dated for Thursday... which means they were still listing me as an active patient on their ward roster. It’s a bit unsettling to think—what if something had happened to me while I was already home?
Honestly, who cares? Some incompetent clerk probably just messed up the dates on the discharge summary, and it's really not a big deal. If something had actually happened to you, the priority would be what happened to you personally—not whether some paperwork has a clerical error on it. Who is really going to care about a typo on a discharge form?
stormylynx14 said:I’m actually having second thoughts now. My partner went through so much just to have this one child, and looking at them, I can tell they'll be an only child forever. And honestly, I know how only children turn out—I see it in myself.😬
That’s exactly why I’ve decided against having any children at all. What would be the point? Why should I deal with all that hassle? It isn't worth putting my partner through the physical toll and risking their health. Besides, what am I going to leave behind? Just more money for Pampers to pocket, especially since I don't even own P&G stock. I value my lifestyle and my privacy too much to trade it all in for constant crying and diaper changes.😎
Kevin White5 is absolutely right—medical school is an absolute grind, and even after you finally cross that finish line, you’re immediately thrown into a shark tank where the children of established doctors tend to have their paths cleared for them. If you don't have someone sitting in a high-level administrative role or acting as a hospital director to pull strings, landing a solid position is an uphill battle. Securing a residency is often even more cutthroat. One practical way to navigate this is to head out to a smaller town or a rural area; there is usually plenty of work available, the stipends are decent enough, and it can actually serve as a stepping stone toward getting your specialization.
The current system isn't just broken and unfair to the patients and those relying on insurance; it's fundamentally dishonest toward the medical professionals who refuse to play along with the corruption.
That makes perfect sense. When people are sick, they become incredibly sensitive to how they are treated. Sometimes doctors treat them poorly, mostly just out of sheer convenience or laziness. I’m not saying being a doctor isn't difficult, but life certainly isn't easy for the patients either. That’s why people end up hating doctors. Those who harbor resentment toward the medical profession love to quote stories about how corrupt physicians are, simply because they truly believe they are.
And that is exactly how the reputation of the medical profession in America has been tarnished. They are viewed as lazy, unmotivated, corrupt, greedy, heartless, and unprofessional—the complete antithesis of the Hippocratic Oath, which these hypocrites choose to ignore. Now, every single incident gets dragged into the public eye, and doctors are essentially crucified in the court of public opinion, regardless of who was actually in the right in a specific case. Even social attitudes are shifting: "So, what do you do? A doctor? Ugh, you're just one of those corrupt types. How many people did you fleece today, and how much kickback did you pocket? Sorry, Mrs. Jones from the office, I don't associate with doctors or drug dealers..." Or even, "A nurse? You're one of those who shrugs off patients and drinks coffee instead of helping people in pain? Get lost before I lose my temper..."
This "genius" with only $600 was demanding money just to remove someone's skin tag. It was a minor procedure that should have been fully covered by Medicare, yet this self-proclaimed "humanitarian" decided to charge the guy 300 dollars, eventually settling on 250. It’s a good thing the patient called the police. What a pathetic excuse for a human being. He works at a hospital, receives a salary, yet he tries to extort extra cash for work that is already being paid for by taxpayers through government funds. A total crook. We really need to implement much harsher penalties for corruption in healthcare, as well as for negligence and malpractice.
It’s just... you know, like that cardiac surgeon from Cleveland? People had been reporting him for quite some time already. Nothing really happened until they decided to strip away his protection, which seemed to be motivated entirely by political maneuvering.
Do you honestly believe they can hold you against your will if they decide your life is at risk? You have every right to refuse any kind of treatment. What’s actually the best way to handle it when someone steps on your toes? I feel like there isn't much middle ground—you either tread lightly, or if you decide to engage, you go all the way and see the conflict through to the end. In other threads, people were discussing how to report misconduct or abuse: filing complaints with a head nurse, taking it up with the chief of medicine, or escalating things to Medicare and similar institutions.
I was wondering if anyone here has ever actually gone through the process of leaving a hospital "against medical advice." I’m having a bit of trouble grasping the practical distinction between doing that and a standard discharge. Aside from the fact that a regular discharge sometimes involves waiting around all weekend just because some junior resident hasn't bothered to sign off on your paperwork yet, I don't see the difference.
When you’re admitted to a facility like Mayo Clinic or any major US hospital, if something goes sideways, the institution and the staff rarely face any real accountability; they always find a way to walk away unscathed. Theoretically, there might be legal liability, but in practice, it feels like a joke. It’s just colleagues looking out for one another and blaming everything on an act of God.
If someone is unhappy with their treatment and decides to leave "against medical advice"—which is a right they absolutely have—what are the actual repercussions? Does it mean you can't return to that specific hospital system? Or could you go to a different one, like a Cleveland Clinic instead? If you do try to return to the original place, will they treat you with hostility or make things difficult, or is there really no lasting consequence at all?
Yes, Trevor, you can certainly believe this case was politically engineered. I am convinced there are plenty of other doctors out there billing private fees for work they are already being paid for by the government, yet it surprises me that we are finally seeing one of them targeted. It seems logical that he isn't being prosecuted because he’s actually corrupt or a thief, but rather for purely political reasons. America is still a long way from having a true rule of law where thieves are prosecuted simply because they are 😢
Yasmin is a low-dose hormonal contraceptive pill that also functions as a diuretic.
It’s truly fascinating how certain "experts" love to offer unsolicited advice along the lines of, "just have a baby and breastfeed," as if anyone would ever make such a life-altering decision based solely on the condition of their breasts. It’s quite a professional take, really.
I can't help but wonder why there is such an aggressive push for mammograms involving ionizing radiation when ultrasound is available and completely harmless. One can only assume it’s simply because it serves the interests of the X-ray manufacturers.
lahor said:You can take those supplements as a preventative measure, but there’s really no proof they actually repair damaged cartilage. Honestly, it often feels like throwing money down the drain. Physical therapists love prescribing them to seniors, who then end up spending their last few dollars at the pharmacy for something that doesn't even work.
I personally took them following my knee surgery, and I genuinely believe they aided my recovery. Regarding the idea of wasting money—look, these things are pretty inexpensive. I would much rather spend a little extra if there’s even a 10% chance of better healing than I would save a few bucks and stay stuck. At the end of the day, my experience was positive. I actually got quite frustrated with my orthopedic surgeon because he wouldn't give me a straight answer; he just sat there philosophizing about how they "might" help or "might not," so I decided to seek a second opinion elsewhere. It’s my money and my choice. If a supplement is harmless and helps a lot of people, I see no reason not to try it.