CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Lifestyle › Health › What makes a doctor "good" in your opinion?

What makes a doctor "good" in your opinion?

Started by wiredcanyon2 · · 👁 5 views · 42 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants wiredcanyon2Jamie StewartAngela WrightEdward Murphy4Lisa Myersmelloworca6Nicholas MyersSamuel Morgan40Chloe Barnes3Kyle Lee7David Scott7Mark Hall10swiftbear86restlessanglerdustymarlin10frozenorca63Brandon Lopez6Morgan Vaughn10Carol Garcia2
Carol Garcia2 Carol Garcia2 Member
13 messages
joined Mar 2014
#41 ·
Angela Wright said:A good doctor:
1. Someone who doesn't consider their education finished just because they graduated from medical school—say, at Johns Hopkins—but continues to actively pursue lifelong learning and specialized training.

Medicine is an evolving field, of course, and staying current is vital—though one also has to keep those foundational basics sharp. It’s surprising how quickly things can slip away if you aren't careful.

2. Someone who uses plain language to explain every detail regarding a condition, diagnosis, and treatment plan...

I think the patient's own preference plays a role here too—especially regarding communication style. I'm certainly no physician, but I notice people gravitate toward different types: some want someone strictly professional who sticks to clinical terminology, while others prefer a more "family doctor" feel—even if the actual quality of care remains identical.

4. Someone who proactively collaborates with colleagues in other specialties—which is often a prerequisite for successfully treating complex conditions.

Shouldn't that be the standard practice?

5. Someone who doesn't just follow the textbook blindly, but looks at medicine through the lens of practical experience.

To truly look outside the box, you first have to master what's inside it. In my view, one should stick to the fundamentals first, then build upon them based on the specific case at hand.

But yes, I agree with most of the points made here—this whole discussion is essentially summarized by these few key ideas.
Angela Wright Angela Wright Regular
731 messages
joined Feb 2007
#42 ·
George Peterson49 said:Wouldn't that just be standard practice?

Maybe in veterinary medicine, where you’re mostly working solo in a clinic and there aren't really highly specialized sub-fields to speak of. Human medicine is an entirely different beast, especially when you look at the interpersonal dynamics and how doctors interact within a hospital system. There isn't much actual collaboration; instead, it's fueled by ego. Honestly, you can count on one hand the number of specialists who aren't too vain to admit they haven't seen a specific case before. Most would actually reach out to a colleague at a top-tier research university or a world-class medical center just to get informed and help their patient. But usually, the conversation hits a wall where they claim it "can't be done" or there's "no solution." Then, if the patient is proactive enough—or has a family capable of handling the logistics—they end up doing all the legwork themselves, discovering that the "impossible" was actually quite manageable.
Carol Garcia2 Carol Garcia2 Member
13 messages
joined Mar 2014
#43 ·
Angela Wright said:Perhaps in veterinary medicine—since practitioners often work independently in their own clinics—those hyper-specialized roles just don't exist, at least not here in the States.

I'm not entirely sure. My own approach is to lean on experts who know more than I do whenever possible—all while ensuring I don't lose that vital connection with my patient.
As for specialists, we certainly have them here in America, even if the field feels broader than human medicine; plus, with the internet, you can always reach out to colleagues abroad for a second opinion.

Medicine is an entirely different beast—especially when you consider the interpersonal dynamics and the relationships between doctors in a hospital setting. There isn't much true collaboration; instead, there's often too much ego involved. In fact, you could count the number of specialists on one hand who aren't too prideful to admit they haven't seen a specific case before. They aren't afraid to contact someone at a world-class center of excellence just to get information and help their patient. Too often, the conversation hits a wall where people say things "can't be done" or there's "no way to help"—and then, if the patient is proactive or has a strong support system, they end up doing the research themselves and discovering that those limits were actually quite arbitrary.

Believe me, that kind of thing happens everywhere.

And regarding the lack of cooperation—I think our healthcare system plays a part in that too; it sometimes feels like it exists just for its own sake, being far too fragmented. At least, that’s how it looks from my perspective.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads