A Critical Analysis Of the Doctor Wont See You Now :: essays research papers

A Critical Analysis of "The Doctor Wont See You Now"Initially, James Gorman appears to be stating that physicians should not be estimablely obligated to treat each and each "slob" that seeks treatment. Thetitle of the essay, and the sarcastic t single, give evidence that the thesis is instead the contrary. Gorman does identify an alarming trend of physicians lookingthrough a cynical eye with an example of a survey by the American medicalAssociation, published November, 1991. " Thirty percent of doctors surveyedsaid they felt no ethical responsibilities to treat AIDS patients" (page 62).This seems to set the short letter of disgust for such physicians. Gorman progresscondemns such physicians by reminding the reader "doctoring is a profession, acalling requiring perpetration and integrity" (page 63).Gorman confirms his argument with the first of many disenchanted views.Making a comparison that " old people who are on their way divulge anyway&qu ot (page62) are responsible for rising wellness care costs.Gorman whence becomes almost offensive when he suggests some AIDS patientsdeserve their dilemma and differents dont. At this point, the reader sees thatGorman is being very sarcastic and bitter towards physicians who mare sharethis view.In paragraph three, Gorman attempts to make an analogy between otherprofessions and related obligations. In essence, the analogy equates the amountof money and personal audition one may have, with the level of care and/orattention one deserves. The analogy appears to be very inappropriate at first,however, this may be exactly what Gorman is trying to point out, making thereader more kindly to the thesis.Gorman begins to touch on a sound idea of preventative treat in paragraphfour, page 62, where he writes "... the medical profession is in conclusion beginningto see that patients have a responsibility for their own health". Thecredibility of the previous statement is destroyed w hen Gorman goes on to make afalse analogy, comparing doctors with small business, and suggests that theiris no difference between the deuce fields. Gorman suggest that, like in smallbusiness, doctors should eliminate the "riffraff" in their establishments.Unfortunately, the definition of riffraff is never revealed.Gorman goes on further to suggest which diseases or ailments should not betreated without any reason except personal bias. The sarcastic tone is turnedup a notch on the proverbial dial from ten to eleven. Making a hasty abstraction would usually destroy credibility on an issue, but used with thetone and thesis of this essay, it actually supports Gormans point.Gorman specifies carpal tunnel syndrome as a merited ailment. In the last