There are mounting worries in the nation about the exodus of doctors from the “big five” specialties — internal medicine, surgery, gynecology, pediatrics and emergency medicine. However, a number of things could be done to encourage doctors to remain in these fields.
The first is to create a worry-free work environment for physicians in the big five specialties. To that end, careful thought will have to be given to the question of doctors’ criminal responsibility. One often sees news reports about drunk drivers who have to pay millions of New Taiwan dollars in compensation for knocking somebody down, yet doctors who treat accident victims may be liable to pay compensation amounting to tens of millions of NT dollars if they fail to save their patients. Consideration should be given to the harm caused to doctors by medical disputes.
The nation should set up a patient injury compensation system for the benefit of the public, and doctors should be encouraged to take out medical liability insurance to reduce the financial burden they may face in the course of litigation. Furthermore, doctors who get involved in medical disputes should not be subject to harsh criminal charges.
Next, reasonable increases should be made to the clinical fees paid to doctors in the “big five” specialties. Fees paid under the National Health Insurance scheme consist of four main components: consultancy fees; diagnosis and treatment fees; medication fees; and dispensary fees. Examination fees are basically the same for all clinical specialties, but diagnosis and treatment fees vary, and this has an impact on doctors’ incomes. Consideration should be given to raising diagnosis and treatment fees for the big five specialties. For example, if, following consultation and examination, a doctor of internal medicine uses an ultrasound scanner to examine a patient’s abdomen, the doctor could be paid an extra ultrasound diagnosis fee. When surgeons perform operations, they could be paid an extra surgery fee.
These days many doctors choose to go into psychiatry or physiotherapy because these fields offer relatively high incomes from diagnosis and treatment fees. In psychiatry, diagnosis and treatment fees for talk therapy are quite high, as are those for rehabilitation in physiotherapy, and medical disputes are relatively rare in these two fields. Family medicine and ear, nose and throat medicine are suitable for independent clinics, so these two fields also attract a lot of doctors.
Third, to a reasonable extent, physicians working in the “big five” specialties should be allowed to participate in the private market. Ophthalmologists receive relatively high incomes from diagnosis and treatment fees, and they also earn money from private payments for eye care. Dermatologists are less liable to get involved in medical disputes than internal medicine specialists and surgeons. They enjoy easier lifestyles and are able to develop their private market, so dermatology has also become a popular career choice
Finally, the government should offer funding for medical students in the “big five” specialties, and it should set a condition that such students have to serve in these departments for at least 10 years after graduation. Taiwan’s experience has been that the time for which publicly funded medical graduates had to serve in their designated fields was too short. After completing their obligatory service, doctors whose studies had been paid for by the government often switched to specialties that offered higher incomes, so the public funding scheme for medical students did not bring great benefits.
Wang Cheng-kun is dean of the E-Chyun Dermatology Clinic.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing