tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12625691.post5748852713902366888..comments2024-02-29T01:43:23.900-05:00Comments on Women's Bioethics Blog: Obama at the AMA: The cost of inaction is greaterLinda MacDonald Glennhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02378544626277000243noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12625691.post-21527084709985424122009-08-08T07:25:06.726-04:002009-08-08T07:25:06.726-04:00I recently read an article in the back of my Penn ...I recently read an article in the back of my Penn Medicine magazine talking about this topic. It talks about the existing physician shortage (in some areas of the country and in certain concentrations like primary care), and the projections for even greater shortages.<br /><br />I wondered about the women who were doctors and why, as women have entered the profession over the last 50-60 years, there are now shortages. You would think that if the number of potential doctors has gone up 100%, that would have done something to prevent this problem.<br /><br />It occurred to me, though, that medical school enrollment is limited, as are the number of medical schools which can license doctors. I've heard in the past that the reason for this kind of limitation is to ensure a basic standard of quality. Without necessarily addressing that argument directly, I'd still like to ask, what is the number (percentage?) of medical students currently, compared with the mid-20th century? Even taking the question of quality of care into account, if the percentage is not twice what it was then, then we've added 100% more high-quality applicants (i.e. women), but have only allowed the same number/percentage of doctors to enter the population.<br /><br />Has anyone thought of this before? I certainly never hear this being talked about in mainstream media, but I guess that's not a surprise for many reasons. (I have heard a lot about nursing shortages and women. Also about women doctors dropping out or working part time and thus being to blame for physician shortages.)<br /><br />Does anyone know to what extent medical schools are limited, and how this compares to past enrollment? I realize there are many other complex aspects to this problem, and many assumptions I'm making in my simple question. For example, I am assuming that the intelligence and talent of doctors in the mid 20th century provided an acceptable level of quality by today's standards. Within that assumption is the idea that acceptance to medical school itself proves a certain standard of intelligence and talent. But putting all that aside, I am still quite curious about the numbers.Barbara Preuningerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01595476115442787839noreply@blogger.com