Defending PA Practice Ownership
The AMA recently debated the possible ethical conflicts involved with PA and NP practice owners hiring supervising physicians.
Some physicians are, of course, concerned about the ethics of PA-owned clinics.
It’s funny. Physicians usually have complete confidence in their ability to practice medicine ethically despite financial considerations. Worried about the influence of insurance companies, corporate health systems, pharmaceutical companies? Don’t sweat that.
The message is always along the lines of, “Physicians will do the right thing regardless of financial conflicts. Physicians should be above reproach.”
Unless a physician happens to be employed by a PA practice owner, that is. Then it’s, “Oh no! This is too much of an ethical conflict for the poor physician.”
"I'm amazed that we even have to think about whether this is ethical or not," said Michael E. Greene, MD, an alternate delegate for the Medical Assn. of Georgia. "To put doctors in the ... employee role of those they are supervising is ludicrous."
Ludicrous? Let’s be honest, this is purely a turf issue. Any ethical conflict is minor, at best. Many physicians simply don’t want PAs and NPs owning practices.
American Academy of Neurology delegate to the AMA Michael A. Williams defended PA and NP ownership, and pointed out that it really isn’t much of an issue for supervising physicians.
"There is a lot of temptation to frame this as a scope-of-practice issue and a financial issue," said Dr. Williams, an employed physician who supervises a physician assistant. "But the physician responsibility in any kind of relationship is the same."
Link