So how much does a Doctor really earn? (1 Viewer)

[KFunk]

We’re not simply talking about altruism & smaller salary packages. We’re talking about the hypocritical claim that the medical profession is altruistic when claiming that the medical graduate salary is allegedly ‘not very much’.

Anecdotally, many of the people I interact with in medical school are driven by altruistic motives and financial considerations (and other factors - e.g. intellectual interest and so forth).

I agree that it is silly for anyone to think that all doctors are altruistic. However, the medical profession is centered around the therapeutic relationship and so sits among the caring professions (along with things like nursing, social work, etc). Thus it is feasible for altruism to be part of the motivation which drives medical students / doctors, and the studies cited above seem to support this claim.

Also, I agree with your claim that people cannot reasonably claim that doctors 'don't earn very much'. Doctors have a highly enviable earning capacity, not to mention job security. Simple doctor salary figures in comparison with national averages demonstrate this.

 

[RogueAcademic]

the desire to 'care for and help others' amongst medical students, is consistent with surveys in other countries2, 8 which have consistently reported altruism as a prime motivation of medical students. By contrast, considerations of status and prestige were of comparatively low importance.

Looks like the survey is designed to ask medical students for their own personal perspectives on why they choose a career in medicine. The predictable results are a reflection of how they view themselves. It does not reflect reality.

It's like what they say about the Oscars - the results are tallied by the industry for the industry. It's Hollywood glamourising themselves, and patting themselves on the back for their own achievements by giving awards to members of their own organisation.

 

[KFunk]

Looks like the survey is designed to ask medical students for their own personal perspectives on why they choose a career in medicine. The predictable results are a reflection of how they view themselves. It does not reflect reality.

It's like what they say about the Oscars - the results are tallied by the industry for the industry. It's Hollywood glamourising themselves, and patting themselves on the back for their own achievements by giving awards to members of their own organisation.

The results may well reflect reality, albeit in an imperfect manner.

The AMWAC report aimed to understand movements in the health workforce in order to guide policy, not to self-glorify the profession. See the attachment below for a more thorough look at the motivation profile that was obtained (from ~ 1,700 respondants, while surveys were sent to almost twice that number). I don't see why it shouldn't be viewed as at least an approximate representation of reality.

It certainly carries more weight than your anecdotal observations (or, indeed, mine).

 

[katie tully]

I'll be honest, eh. I've been working in close proximity to Dr's the last few months, and any idea I had of doing grad med has been crushed by the hammer of pomposity being slammed on my head by these arrogant a holes.

I can count on one hand how many of them have been even remotely decent towards me, paediatricians it seems have a flair for people. Shame about the Radiologists and GP's. It has totally disillusioned me from the profession.

Reason # 34578 for not entering medicine unless you really want to be a Dr: Putting up with other Dr's.

 

[RogueAcademic]

Anecdotally, many of the people I interact with in medical school are driven by altruistic motives and financial considerations (and other factors - e.g. intellectual interest and so forth)

I fail to see how altruism, by its definition, is applicable to someone who claims to be selfless and therefore altruistic, and yet is concerned (and still not satisfied as per SWSydneyTutor's criticism) with financial reward of the kind that is only offered in the medical profession (as opposed to, say the nursing profession). I can understand the basic need for monetary remuneration (absolutely nothing wrong with that) but if that was the only concern, then surely nursing would also offer altruistic and basic monetary opportunities. But as I mentioned earlier, I have never met a single med student or med-student-hopeful who would be happy to consider nursing as an alternative career, they wouldn't be caught dead as a nurse. I'm not even referring to the public/private remuneration debate in the med community.. if it was truly altruistic, surely it wouldn't matter, the public sector already offers more than adequate remuneration as it is.

I can see how one could be driven by altruistic motives and intellectual interest, but altruism and financial rewards of the kind afforded by the medical profession... again, a crude test of true altruism is whether these same medical students would be just as happy to work as a nurse in the nursing profession if their med careers hadn't worked out.

The results may well reflect reality, albeit in an imperfect manner. The AMWAC report aimed to understand movements in the health workforce in order to guide policy, not to self-glorify the profession.

It's not reality from an independent perspective, there is no independent comparison/analysis, a control so to speak. The basic question that that survey asks is: "How do you medical students view yourselves and the choices you yourselves make?". It's a wholly subjective perspective, not an objective assessment.

You could quite easily send a similarly structured survey to the staff at Guantanamo Bay and ask: "How do you view yourselves in your job and the choices you make?". I guarantee the results would show that most of the staff there will justify their work there as "protecting freedoms" and other perceived altruistic justifications. You may say the results of this survey reflects reality, but it's reality from their perspective, however twisted and non-reflective of reality it may be.

 

[Bacilli]

Racist cunt. Parents know whats best for you, start using your biological imperative and realize some fundamental respect

On the topic of $$$/prestige, why would one enter Monash's combined LLB/MBBS. I'm aware you do your first year of Med first, but why pickup a completely different profession in the second year...? I guess some would argue they want to be a medical negligence barrister?? Other then that, I doubt it's for 'altruistic' reasons...

IMO it is the thought of running into a girl in the bar, hoping for that question-

"So...wat do you do?"

"I'm a doctor..."

"OMG wow..."

"And a lawyer, honey..."

"OMFG...Lets Fuck"

Ahhhhhhhhahahahahahhalolz it's interesting to hear why people want to study medicine although it's difficult to determine whether they are telling the truth.

What do you think would be the main reason why the majority of applicants would want to become a Doctor? How old is this person who is making this decision? 17? 18? At a young age I believe students are attracted to medicine because of the money. There are genuine applications with a keen interest in the study of desease; it's prevention, causes etc however being 18 is really not the right age to determine whether such a career is suitable. I know a 14 y/o girl who has her head in anatomy and medicine books from the 19th century, she is aiming for medicine and I have no doubt she'll make it. This girl is an example of a suitable applicant when the time comes. The typical student graduates the HSC and has a month or two to decide on what they want to study. Maybe more time considering they sit the UMAT.
My point is that I think the decision to study medicine is far too early and we can change this by offering only graduate medicine.

 

[PrettyVacant]

I am not attracted to medicine because of the money and I believe that a lot of my fellow classmates (who I know personally) are also not attracted to medicine because of the money, but because they have a genuine interest in learning about the human body and bettering society/the world P Lol, our youthful idealism..).

If I wanted money I'd do finance or get an accounting cadetship or something.

 

[KFunk]

I fail to see how altruism, by its definition, is applicable to someone who claims to be selfless and therefore altruistic, and yet is concerned (and still not satisfied as per SWSydneyTutor's criticism) with financial reward of the kind that is only offered in the medical profession (as opposed to, say the nursing profession). I can understand the basic need for monetary remuneration (absolutely nothing wrong with that) but if that was the only concern, then surely nursing would also offer altruistic and basic monetary opportunities. But as I mentioned earlier, I have never met a single med student or med-student-hopeful who would be happy to consider nursing as an alternative career, they wouldn't be caught dead as a nurse. I'm not even referring to the public/private remuneration debate in the med community.. if it was truly altruistic, surely it wouldn't matter, the public sector already offers more than adequate remuneration as it is.

I can see how one could be driven by altruistic motives and intellectual interest, but altruism and financial rewards of the kind afforded by the medical profession... again, a crude test of true altruism is whether these same medical students would be just as happy to work as a nurse in the nursing profession if their med careers hadn't worked out.

All this is testament to the fact that in any one individual there are multiple motivations at work - notably intellectual interest is another significant factor. Your proposed test is only a test to determine whether a person's motivations are purely altruistic but cannot properly distinguish between people whose mixed motives either do or do not include altruistic intent.

Be more realistic - anyone claiming that altruism is the sole motivator is either being rhetorical or is mistaken. You are making a straw man argument. Also, if altruism is seen as 'motivation out of concern for others' (versus 'motivation solely out of concern for others) then the confusions raised in you first sentence should be partially dissolved.

 

[blue_chameleon]

The typical student graduates the HSC and has a month or two to decide on what they want to study. Maybe more time considering they sit the UMAT.
My point is that I think the decision to study medicine is far too early and we can change this by offering only graduate medicine.

I tend to agree with this.

This is why, imo, it makes sense to allocate the majority of MBBS placements to mature aged student (or those aged over 21).

However, I guess the UMAT interviews play a pretty good role in determining who is suitable. But even this is not a sure thing.

 

[KFunk]

It's not reality from an independent perspective, there is no independent comparison/analysis, a control so to speak. The basic question that that survey asks is: "How do you medical students view yourselves and the choices you yourselves make?". It's a wholly subjective perspective, not an objective assessment.

You're being too critical of surveys as a research tool. They're imperfect and so they must accept some degree of error in the measurements they make. Take, for example, the result in the survey that "intellectual content of the specialty" is an important factor for the majority of doctors. Do you really think that this result can be so readily dismissed?

Even if you reject the raw figure, surely it demonstrates that decisions, and the associated motivations, are multi-factorial in nature and that the dichotomy of 'purely altruistic versus selfish' is a false one.

 

[katie tully]

My anecdotal story about doctors was the best.

 

[iSplicer]

What do you want to do when you finish High School?

Advanced mathematics/Engineering

 

[PrettyVacant]

Why do you think HSC graduates are any less capable of making the decision that they want to be doctors?? =\ Just because someone is older, doesn't mean they'll necessarily be doing medicine for the "right" reasons (whatever you think they are). I think as long as high school leavers have the intellectual capacity, genuine interest and the right kind of attitude (which is determined by the interviewers at the interview), they shouldn't be forced to do postgraduate medicine if they know that medicine is what they want to do.

 

[RogueAcademic]

Be more realistic - anyone claiming that altruism is the sole motivator is either being rhetorical or is mistaken.

I never argued that doctors should be in it for purely altruistic purposes, you're mistaken if that's the case. I agreed with the basic need for remuneration amongst other things.

The point I'm debating here is the use of a highly subjective survey as 'proof' of an objective issue.

 

[KFunk]

I never argued that doctors should be in it for purely altruistic purposes, you're mistaken if that's the case. I agreed with the basic need for remuneration amongst other things.

The point I'm debating here is the use of a highly subjective survey as 'proof' of an objective issue.

Your 'would you consider nursing?' argument requires a pure altruism assumption in order to be valid. I was largely making the point about pure altruism to demonstrate that the nurse argument is extremely weak.

 

[KFunk]

My anecdotal story about doctors was the best.

It was a touching story KT. Especially the part about a holes. Medicine is certainly not without its douchebags.

 

[KFunk]

P.S. I like your numbat.

 

[katie tully]

thank you.

 

[KFunk]

The point I'm debating here is the use of a highly subjective survey as 'proof' of an objective issue.

There goes social science?

 

[RogueAcademic]

Take, for example, the result in the survey that "intellectual content of the specialty" is an important factor for the majority of doctors. Do you really think that this result can be so readily dismissed?

The results are all acceptable as long as you accept that they are nothing but personal perspectives, that's all they are, personal perspectives. Same as the Gitmo example I offered earlier, the results of that survey reveals the reasons why certain people make the decisions they do, regardless of whether it's a reflection of reality or not from an objective standpoint.

I'll give you another example - you might send a similarly structured survey to George W Bush and he'll tell you the same thing, all his presidential decisions have been for the good of the world in the fight against terrorism. Same as all the med students who claim to be doing what they do for altruistic reasons.

Now, we all know Bush has been a major disaster and is generally perceived by the rest of the US and the world as one of the US's worst presidents, as evidenced by the WMD argument in Iraq and other issues.

I'm not saying med students are full of shit, but my point is, again and again to you, that it merely shows how med students perceive themselves only. The survey's worth is only as a subjective insight as to how med students justify their career decisions.