Will a Chiropractic Public Relations Campaign Work?
Dear Editor:
I have been practicing for 25 years and have often commented on the lack of PR from our profession. I have been a member of the ACA since becoming a chiropractor. From my standpoint as a private doctor, I have never seen any PR benefit espoused by the ACA. Talk is cheap and it will be interesting if this really happens, or if it gets bogged down in rhetorical politics. Let's hope we have leadership capable of steering this awesome possibility.
Editor's note: This letter is in response to "Chiropractic Leaders Sign Declaration of United Public Relations, Dec. 15, 2003 DC; [url=http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/21/26/07.html]http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/21/26/07.html[/url].
Russ Berg, DC
Phoenix, Arizona
"Chiropractors are climbing all over each other"
Dear Editor:
In the Nov. 17, 2003 issue, Daniel Osborne told us about his experience at the International Association of Special Investigative Units Seminar [www.chiroweb.com/archives/21/24/11.html]. According to him, the focus of the meeting was on how to destroy chiropractic because most, if not all, doctors of chiropractic are schysters and involved in fraud.
It has been my experience that it is almost impossible to find a medical doctor who will testify against or slander another MD. It is not easy to find one who will say that a colleague overcharged or overtreated a patient for personal financial gain. It is like there is an unwritten code that an attack on a colleague is an attack on the entire profession.
The situation is different in chiropractic. Chiropractors are climbing all over each other for the opportunity to cut claims and even testify against one another with accusations of fraudulent activities. Many of these claims-cutters are even supposed leaders in our profession or professors in our colleges. They do not seem to consider that an unjustified attack on any individual chiropractor is an attack on the chiropractic profession.
The major flaw in the insurance consultant industry is that if consultants do not tell the insurers what insurers want to hear, the consultants will lose their jobs, and others will take their places cutting claims.
The big reason why one MD does not attack another MD's actions or integrity is because they have to work together in hospitals and rely on lateral referrals. They have to stick together. Since DCs are more independent, they are naturally more vulnerable to attack. In the present situation, chiropractors care more about themselves than about the profession, so the insurance industry will continue to regard all chiropractors as frauds and all medical doctors as humanitarians.
Much of this reality is our own fault. It will change when insurance consultants start thinking of themselves as teachers who explain the value of chiropractic to their employers, rather than thinking of themselves as claims-cutters.
Tom Rexroth, DC
West Burlington, Iowa
"I hope the 'house divided' will soon wake up and see the bigger picture" Dear Editor:
It infuriates me when I read such things as presented in Mr. Osborne's article. I am not angry at him; I am thankful he presented it for us to read. Statistics show that chiropractic is only a small percentage of the problem - yet we get an inverse percentage of the negative attention.
I wonder what would happen if our national organizations decided to agree to disagree on certain issues and offered chiropractors the right to practice according to their training. For example, just because you have the right to perform injectables doesn't mean you have to, and you don't have to try and make everyone else perform them, either. I would much rather have the option to choose what I want to utilize in my practice than no option at all.
It seems to me that we spend all our time and money arguing among ourselves, trying to force this or that belief system on others. As a result, we don't have the time and money to combat such ridiculous insurgencies (like the International Association of Special Investigative Units Seminar) on our legitimacy as chiropractors. I hope the "house divided" will soon wake up, see the bigger picture, and get it together before we no longer have a house to get together.
Joseph F. Garlett Jr., DC
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Chiropractic Versus the Insurance Industry Dear Editor:
"A Chiropractor's Dilemma," written by Stephen W. Chase [Feb. 12 DC] is not a dilemma; it is a travesty. It is obvious to me that the insurance conglomerate plays a surrogate role to the medical profession in order to force chiropractic out of the insurance industry.
I have been in the chiropractic profession since 1952, and was considered an expert witness for chiropractic in the Maryland court systems. During my career, I received countless Independent Medical Examinations (IMEs), and my defense was always offense. I would write a 10-page rebuttal for every page of the IME report, beginning with the fact that the doctor providing the IME was unqualified because he or she was not a medical doctor, and added that an IME is a medical interpretation of chiropractic; and the proper terminology should be "Independent Chiropractic Examination" (ICE). I would surgically dissect every word, sentence and paragraph, providing a chiropractic explanation, protocol, and dissertation on every issue. I never lost an insurance case or went unpaid.
Frequently, I have been asked by various insurance companies and the legal profession to be their IME employee; my response has always been, "I will not be your hatchet man against my own profession."
In 1985, I began my retirement process; by 1995, I had easily solved the insurance and Medicare debacle by returning to my early roots of the '50s and becoming a cash practice. To make my semi-retired life more comfortable, I refused all types of insurance cases, referring them to my colleagues.
In my early chiropractic days, I joined the crusade for insurance and Medicare acceptance and payment for chiropractic services. I now pass the torch to today's chiropractic youth, advising them to stand up for chiropractic principles and legal rights in order to achieve unqualified acceptance from the insurance industry, because their profession and their patients will always support them.
Charles N. Cooper, DC
Baltimore, Maryland
