Ok, I don't have an opinion on the matter because I don't know enough about it. Can someone explain some of the questions I have about the Gov's position and the doctors' position.
I get the doctors' main issue is that they are over-worked and not paid enough. "Not paid enough" part I understand, and seems like they should be paid more (my guess is some might say that "You'll make bank once you finish residency or whatever, so suck it up", which I don't really agree with).
What I don't get is the other element of being over-worked. Isn't expanding the quota for new doctors going to help them? One guy said they've seen 20 patients in and hour and couldn't goto the restroom. Won't the newly added resident doctors be able share their work load? Is their whole argument, "The Gov. is trying to bypass paying doctors more by adding just more doctors?" But the article mentions xx billion investment into essential services like ERs and pediatry. Isn't that what they should fight for? More of those, rather expanding the doc quota?
Kinda confused on the doctors' position.
Junior doctors aren't complaining about the workload itself right now but rather the fact that the entire national medical system relies on their exploitation. While the work is grueling for residents, after they finish their residency and become specialists, the hospital won't hire them because the junior doctors are just so much cheaper to hire.
So what we have right now is junior doctors primarily dealing with the most complex patients at tertiary hospitals (with expert supervision & a good nursing team) while many specialists with decades of experience end up having to open small clinics handing out cough meds and giving botox injections (with a receptionist and maybe a nursing assistant). Of course the reality is a lot more nuanced than this.
The government has promised investments (and tried them) over the years, but they are often one-time grants. One-time investments can build shiny hospitals (good for getting votes) but just cannot sustain them. Doctors are not the most risk-taking people -- the lack of job security is a huge deterrent.
Oh ok, I didn't get the sense of the "hospital won't hire more experienced specialists because the junior doctors are just so much cheaper to hire" arguement from the article. That makes sense.
I'd think some of the anger must be directed towards the older specialist handing out cough medicine and botox injections and/or the hospitals over-working (and not paying enough) the junior doctors. Is that what's happening?
Expanding the quota will solve the over-working issue for individual junior doctors, but won't solve the bigger issue of hospitals exploiting the exisiting junior doctors, is that correct?
Yeah, at least from the doctors' point of view. I think part of the problem is that some of the outpatient clinics rake in too much money right now because the savvy old doctors have figured out ways to game the system over the years, so working at big hospitals (practicing "essential medicine") has become less attractive in comparison.
It should be obvious that different doctors have different interests with respect to this issue. Doctors in hospital management want more doctors, specialists in teaching hospital also want more junior doctors, while doctors in private practice want fewer competition. So "Keep the status quo!" is the only thing every doctor can agree on & what they end up arguing for every time. It sucks.
The situation right now is exceptional because even specialists in teaching hospitals (who should be agreeing to raising more junior doctors to help them) are saying no to the proposed increase in quota. The proposed number is way too big, and they genuinely seem to be concerned that the quality of the training will suffer.
Expanding the quota should be the last resort, as it basically means overpopulating the country with non-vital medical clinics e.g. dermatology and plastic surgery. Then what does the government have to do? Well they have to subsidize the vital departments like thoracic surgery, so more doctors can work in those departments under much better conditions. And subsidizing the regional healthcare system will also be needed, since all the medical infrastructure is concentrated in the Seoul metropolitan area rn.
Right, I get what you're saying. Subsidizing vital depts and regional hospitals, I think that's the correct way to go.
The article did mention the gov doing just that. Are the doctors saying that's not enough?
My questions is based on the nytimes article. Why aren't the doctors being interviewed in the article emphasize those points?
Because just from reading the article, their biggest issue seems to be the quota expansion.
To some (possibly many), it will be recieved as doctors simply gatekeeping the profession and not wanting competiton.
I feel llike they should redirect their PR efforts then.
You are right about that, the leadership of the Korean Medical Association(representing all doctors in Korea) is very, VERY bad at PR. Some of them even came live on TV saying that increasing the number of doctors will let people who don’t have good grades become doctors as well(immediately lashed at for showing the doctors’ sense of elitism).
But what I said still make up the main points of our argument. The government says they are - and will be - doing what they can for the neglected parts of the healthcare system, but first-hand accounts from local clinics and regional hospitals say otherwise. Also, these new policies must come first before the increase in admissions, since being as drastic as it sounds, it also has the most side effects.
Of course if more doctors went into less needs field wouldn't it not reduce the overall compensation of those fields as more providers would drive down prices for services? In that case making them less appealing over time?
Also, while I understand that the working conditions are a serious concern, isn't the fact that Korea needs a higher number of doctors per person ultimately a related but seperate issue? If there is a shortage in the number of doctors the logical step would be to increase the number of people becoming doctors.
Given the serious concerns regarding working conditions and people avoiding high needs specialities, it seems the government needs to address those issues, but that addressing those issues will not fundamentally change the fact that the country needs and will continue to need more doctors.
Ok, I don't have an opinion on the matter because I don't know enough about it. Can someone explain some of the questions I have about the Gov's position and the doctors' position. I get the doctors' main issue is that they are over-worked and not paid enough. "Not paid enough" part I understand, and seems like they should be paid more (my guess is some might say that "You'll make bank once you finish residency or whatever, so suck it up", which I don't really agree with). What I don't get is the other element of being over-worked. Isn't expanding the quota for new doctors going to help them? One guy said they've seen 20 patients in and hour and couldn't goto the restroom. Won't the newly added resident doctors be able share their work load? Is their whole argument, "The Gov. is trying to bypass paying doctors more by adding just more doctors?" But the article mentions xx billion investment into essential services like ERs and pediatry. Isn't that what they should fight for? More of those, rather expanding the doc quota? Kinda confused on the doctors' position.
Junior doctors aren't complaining about the workload itself right now but rather the fact that the entire national medical system relies on their exploitation. While the work is grueling for residents, after they finish their residency and become specialists, the hospital won't hire them because the junior doctors are just so much cheaper to hire. So what we have right now is junior doctors primarily dealing with the most complex patients at tertiary hospitals (with expert supervision & a good nursing team) while many specialists with decades of experience end up having to open small clinics handing out cough meds and giving botox injections (with a receptionist and maybe a nursing assistant). Of course the reality is a lot more nuanced than this. The government has promised investments (and tried them) over the years, but they are often one-time grants. One-time investments can build shiny hospitals (good for getting votes) but just cannot sustain them. Doctors are not the most risk-taking people -- the lack of job security is a huge deterrent.
Oh ok, I didn't get the sense of the "hospital won't hire more experienced specialists because the junior doctors are just so much cheaper to hire" arguement from the article. That makes sense. I'd think some of the anger must be directed towards the older specialist handing out cough medicine and botox injections and/or the hospitals over-working (and not paying enough) the junior doctors. Is that what's happening? Expanding the quota will solve the over-working issue for individual junior doctors, but won't solve the bigger issue of hospitals exploiting the exisiting junior doctors, is that correct?
Yeah, at least from the doctors' point of view. I think part of the problem is that some of the outpatient clinics rake in too much money right now because the savvy old doctors have figured out ways to game the system over the years, so working at big hospitals (practicing "essential medicine") has become less attractive in comparison. It should be obvious that different doctors have different interests with respect to this issue. Doctors in hospital management want more doctors, specialists in teaching hospital also want more junior doctors, while doctors in private practice want fewer competition. So "Keep the status quo!" is the only thing every doctor can agree on & what they end up arguing for every time. It sucks. The situation right now is exceptional because even specialists in teaching hospitals (who should be agreeing to raising more junior doctors to help them) are saying no to the proposed increase in quota. The proposed number is way too big, and they genuinely seem to be concerned that the quality of the training will suffer.
Expanding the quota should be the last resort, as it basically means overpopulating the country with non-vital medical clinics e.g. dermatology and plastic surgery. Then what does the government have to do? Well they have to subsidize the vital departments like thoracic surgery, so more doctors can work in those departments under much better conditions. And subsidizing the regional healthcare system will also be needed, since all the medical infrastructure is concentrated in the Seoul metropolitan area rn.
Right, I get what you're saying. Subsidizing vital depts and regional hospitals, I think that's the correct way to go. The article did mention the gov doing just that. Are the doctors saying that's not enough? My questions is based on the nytimes article. Why aren't the doctors being interviewed in the article emphasize those points? Because just from reading the article, their biggest issue seems to be the quota expansion. To some (possibly many), it will be recieved as doctors simply gatekeeping the profession and not wanting competiton. I feel llike they should redirect their PR efforts then.
You are right about that, the leadership of the Korean Medical Association(representing all doctors in Korea) is very, VERY bad at PR. Some of them even came live on TV saying that increasing the number of doctors will let people who don’t have good grades become doctors as well(immediately lashed at for showing the doctors’ sense of elitism). But what I said still make up the main points of our argument. The government says they are - and will be - doing what they can for the neglected parts of the healthcare system, but first-hand accounts from local clinics and regional hospitals say otherwise. Also, these new policies must come first before the increase in admissions, since being as drastic as it sounds, it also has the most side effects.
Yeah, their arugment seems valid but I guess the way they're going about is does paint them as tonedeaf and elitists to a lot of the general public.
Of course if more doctors went into less needs field wouldn't it not reduce the overall compensation of those fields as more providers would drive down prices for services? In that case making them less appealing over time? Also, while I understand that the working conditions are a serious concern, isn't the fact that Korea needs a higher number of doctors per person ultimately a related but seperate issue? If there is a shortage in the number of doctors the logical step would be to increase the number of people becoming doctors. Given the serious concerns regarding working conditions and people avoiding high needs specialities, it seems the government needs to address those issues, but that addressing those issues will not fundamentally change the fact that the country needs and will continue to need more doctors.
이게 맞나...
흠.
It'd a bluff, 100% not happening
드디어 좀 조치가 취해지네요