Why DCs Need MDs
Dear Editor:
What an interesting Oct. 1 issue – and interestingly contradictory! Above the fold, front page: "Building the DC/MD" Bridge." On page 3 in his Report of Findings, Don Petersen discusses getting labwork and how he left the field blank that asked for the name of his medical doctor. Why? Because, as he states: "I don't have one. (Why should I?)"
Many chiropractors denigrate the medical profession as drug-pushing robots, and yet the first article encourages earning their respect and building an economic practice model by including them as enthusiastic referrers to chiropractic practices. I didn't see the word subluxation used in the article, but it did refer to asymmetry and unlocking spinal segments. Why? If we ask MDs to refer to us so we can take care of their patients' subluxations, it means either nothing to them or something about partial dislocation of spinal segments, which makes no sense to them, either.
As a profession, we have to ask ourselves if we truly wish to be part of the current health care system, which requires good and respectful communication between providers and a coherent common language which facilitates that communication.
Don, why should one have a medical doctor? Because you might need one; either for a problem that can't be managed by chiropractic or to build an economic practice model. Saying that MDs are not necessary, and insisting on using language that confuses the issue of what we do and how it might help our mutual patients, isn't going to get us anywhere.
Cathlynn Groh, DC-APC
Santa Fe, N.M.
