Atheist doctors more likely to care for the poor than religious ones

[pagol-chagol]

http://pressesc.com/news/80931072007...religious-ones

Atheist doctors are likely to practice medicine among the underprivileged than religious physicians, even though most religions call on the faithful to serve the poor, according to the results of large cross-sectional survey of US medical practitioners published in Annals of Family Medicine.

Researchers from the University of Chicago and Yale New Haven Hospital report that 31 percent of physicians who were more religious—as measured by "intrinsic religiosity" as well as frequency of attendance at religious services—practiced among the underserved, compared to 35 percent of physicians who described their religion as atheist, agnostic or none.

"This came as both a surprise and a disappointment," study author Farr Curlin, MD, said. "The Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist scriptures all urge physicians to care for the poor, and the great majority of religious physicians describe their practice of medicine as a calling. Yet we found that religious physicians were not more likely to report practice among the underserved than their secular colleagues." ...

...
Curlin and colleagues also noted that those who identified themselves as very spiritual, whether or not they were religious, were roughly twice as likely to care for the under-served as those who described their spirituality as low.

[Fazal]

I think now a days both kind of doctors ( atheist or religious) care less about poor care more about the money. It more like a business now and patients are their clients. Campare them with car mechanics. You go to them, they will finds 5 other problems. They see an opportunity to make some money...atheist or religious it doesn't matter.

[shaad]

Note that the "more religious" doctors as well as the atheist/agnostic ones were self-identified in a survey. Particular pertinent are the questions that were asked to determine if the doctors displayed "intrinsic religiosity":

Researchers asked physicians if they agreed or disagreed with two statements: "I try hard to carry my religious beliefs over into all my other dealings in life," and "My whole approach to life is based on my religion." They were also asked how often they attended religious services.

Now, keep in mind that the US, like Bangladesh, is quite a religious nation; where identifying yourself as an atheist or an agnostic carries a certain social stigma. As a consequence, many people who are actually not necessarily devoutly religious, are quite likely to identify themselves as such. Which suggests that the group of people who identified themselves as atheist or agnostic are, on average, likely to be more honest and principled than say, the group who identified themselves as "more religious". Note that I am not saying that religious people are necessarily less honest or principled, just that this survey was conducted in such a way that the group that identified themselves as "more religious" could be less honest and principled. And there could well be a good correlation between how principled physicians are and their tenedency to practice medicine among the underprivileged.

Please keep in mind that this is not an explanation; it's just one (of many possible) hypothesis that was not controlled for in this study.

Another hypothesis is the possibility that religious people put considerable emphasis in the efficacy of prayer or attending religious services in getting them into heaven (or breaking out of the endless circle of rebirth/reincarnation), as much as or more so than say, charitable acts. Athesist/agnostic physicians don't have to deal with this and can devote themselves more thoroughly to their practice.

Yet a third hypothesis is that the lack of belief by atheists and agnostics might make them more compassionate doctors; if one doesn't believe in an afterlife, if one believes that this life is the only shot at existence that we get, then if one is an ethical person, one has an obligation to try to save as many lives and alleviate as much pain as one can.

[Anher]

This seems a bit misleading. There’s only a difference of 4 percentage points and that’s almost always within the margin of error for surveys. Guess a headline saying “Atheist doctors just as likely to care for the poor than religious ones” doesn’t sell enough. It was also hardly a scientific survey as the mailed out the survey and only 63% responded. I’m not putting much in this one.
The title of the article, “Atheist doctors more likely to care for the poor than religious ones”, is not supported in the conclusion of the report, “Physicians who are more religious do not appear to disproportionately care for the underserved.”.

Clearly this article is missing some key points. Mainly the ways in which these atheists are “caring for” the poor. I’d bet my left kidney these amoral crackpots are only caring for the poor so they can steal their organs and sell them to fund their wicked worldly delights. That’s the only possible explanation. Without the orders of a god to follow they can’t possibly be doing anything charitable or kind.

[shaad]

Originally Posted by I_Knockout_U
Clearly this article is missing some key points. Mainly the ways in which these atheists are “caring for” the poor. I’d bet my left kidney these amoral crackpots are only caring for the poor so they can steal their organs and sell them to fund their wicked worldly delights. That’s the only possible explanation. Without the orders of a god to follow they can’t possibly be doing anything charitable or kind.

I_Knockout_U, are you being facetious, or are you seriously suggesting that atheists and agnostics cannot be moral and ethical people?

[chinaman]

Originally Posted by Fazal
I think now a days both kind of doctors ( atheist or religious) care less about poor care more about the money. It more like a business now and patients are their clients.

Whether we like it or not, generally speaking, it has been a business and it will remain so. However, the by product is lucrative

As long as the physician provides due service professionally, his service is done. Asking for extra service? If you're lucky, you might get it. Should you get mad if that extra services, like expecting more caring for poor and less caring for money, are not there? I think not

[layperson]

Originally Posted by chinaman
Whether we like it or not, generally speaking, it has been a business and it will remain so. However, the by product is lucrative

As long as the physician provides due service professionally, his service is done. Asking for extra service? If you're lucky, you might get it. Should you get mad if that extra services, like expecting more caring for poor and less caring for money, are not there? I think not

Perfectly put. Agreee completely with this. As long as the doctor is doing his job professsionally and to the best of his ability he has the right to charge whatever service fee he deems he deserves. It is a business but then again there are some doctors who would treat the poor for free in addition to making tons of money. My grandfather used to treat the poor free of cost but that did not keep him away from the luxuries of life. He travelled in more countries than me and led a more affluent life than what I can afford. As rightly said by chinaman the by product of this business is socially very desirable and needed.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by I_Knockout_U
I’d bet my left kidney these amoral crackpots are only caring for the poor so they can steal their organs and sell them to fund their wicked worldly delights. .

you used the term amoral rather than immoral. is that intentional?

there are many who don't have a theistic belief in the idea of creation. they don't feel the need to rely on age old cosmology or speculate on ontology from a monotheistic perspective. for them, morality is independent from religious belief. there are many who don't feel that the alternative to good is evil because god would otherwise punish the evil-dooer. for them, doing good is its own reward.

although i would add to it that for most brought up in a bangladeshi or muslim culture, or for that matter devout christian background, would find the concept baffling as they seem to equate the religious with good.

[Orpheus]

Doctors are poor despite what you guys may think... If the sole purpose of doctors was to make money (as some of you put it), I think getting an MD degree is probably the dumbest way to do it. There are far more easier way to make money. How many rich people can you name that are doctors?

And I think expecting doctors to do pro bono work is a bit naive. When was the last time YOU helped a poor person? Poor people do not only get sick, they also need food, clothes, money management, virus removal from computers etc etc...

You should not be concerned about doctors paycheck rather you should be concerned about your countries policies on health care. How does it serve the poor people? kapish?

[Orpheus]

Here are some ways u can help poor ppl if u feel doctors should "care" abt them:

if u r a cabby: give free rides
pharmacist: free medicine
IT: free computer
farmers etc: free rice, free chicken, free fish
garments owner: free clothes
Fazal: free trip to europe