Perspectives
Busting the Medical Trust? Professional Self-Regulation and the Imperatives of Competition
Abstract
Whereas medical professionalism is rooted in a tradition of self-regulation, the American constitutional structure is based on states’ inherent powers to protect the public’s health and safety. For more than 100 years, state legislatures have accommodated these dual prerogatives by turning to practicing physicians to regulate the practice of medicine via service on state medical examining boards. This delegation of authority resolves the conflict between professional autonomy and state control but introduces a latent tension between the private structure and the public function of the regulatory bodies themselves.This content is limited to qualifying members.
Existing members, please login first
If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.
Purchase only this article ($25)
Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.
Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)
Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.
Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)
Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.
References
1. Jacobson v Mass, 197 US 11 (1905).
2. Wing KR. The Law and the Public’s Health. 5th ed. Chicago: Health Administration Press; 1999:126-127.
3. Madara JL, Burkhart J. Professionalism, self-regulation, and motivation: how did health care get this so wrong? JAMA 2015;313:1793-1794.
4. Chaudhry HJ, Gifford JD, Hengerer AS. Ensuring competency and professionalism through state medical licensing. JAMA 2015;313:1791-1792.
5. Dent v W Va, 129 US 114 (1889).
6. NC State Bd of Dental Examiners v FTC, 574 US_ (2015).
7. Am Med Ass’n v US, 317 US 519 (1943).
8. Goldfarb v Va State Bar, 421 US 773 (1975).
9. Nat’l Soc’y of Prof Engineers v US, 435 US 679 (1978).
10. Ariz v Maricopa County Med Soc’y, 457 US 332 (1982).
11. Parker v. Brown, 317 US 341 (1943).
12. Cal Retail Liquor Dealers Ass’n v Midcal Aluminum, Inc, 445 US 97 (1980).
13. NC Gen Stat Ann §90-22(b).
14. Bierig JR, Horowitz SJ, Austin S. Brief of the American Dental Association, American Medical Association, et al as amici curiae in support of petitioner. May 30, 2014. http://www.ada.org/~/media/ADA/Member%20Center/FIles/legal_amicus-brief-for-nc-dental-board-case.ashx. Accessed July 6, 2015.
15. Center for Public Interest Law, Citizen Advocacy Center, Consumers Union. Open letter of inquiry and request for documents. http://safepatientproject.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/FINAL-Letter-to-state-AGs-re-NC-dental-case-5-4-15.pdf. Published May 4, 2015. Accessed July 9, 2015.
16. Teladoc complaint. http://www.teladoc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2015-4-29-Teladoc-et-al-v-TMB-et-al-Complaint-As-Filed.pdf. Accessed July 9, 2015.
17. Alabama State Board of Medical Examiners. Emergency Repeal of Chapter 540-X-15, Telehealth. http://www.albme.org/Documents/Rules/Temp/540-X-15ER%20repealed.pdf. Published August 25, 2015. Accessed November 20, 2015.
18. Sage W. Competitive harm from state licensing boards: first North Carolina dentists, now Texas physicians? http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2015/05/27/competitive-harm-from-state-licensing-boards-first-north-carolina-dentists-now-texas-physicians/. Published May 27, 2015. Accessed November 20, 2015.
19. Supreme Court. Docket 13Y534. North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners, Petitioner, v Federal Trade Commission. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/13-534_l6h1.pdf. Accessed July 9, 2015.
20. Shaw GB. The Doctor’s Dilemma. Fairfield, IA: Akasha Publishing;2008:37.
21. Federal Trade Commission. Staff guidance on active supervision of state regulatory boards controlled by mrket participants. https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/attachments/competition-policy-guidance/active_supervision_of_state_boards.pdf. Published October 2015. Accessed October 15, 2015.
22. NC Gen Stat Ann §90-40.1.
23. Governor of the State of Oklahoma. Executive Order 2015-33. July 17, 2015. https://www.sos.ok.gov/documents/executive/993.pdf. Accessed October 15, 2015.
24. Attorney General of the State of California. Opinion 15Y402. September 10, 2015. http://src.bna.com/EH. Accessed November 20, 2015.
25. Starr P. The Social Transformation of American Medicine. New York: Basic Books; 1982:23.
