<p>You said that patient history is extremely important in curing or treating a patient. If the patient needs a socializing doctor in order to properly give information to the doctor wouldn’t that be the patients fault and not the doctors? </p>
<p>If a patient X was prompted for his medical history by a socially awkward doctor: something like do u have any STDs… and he felt uncomfortable with sharing that kind of info then thats the patient’s problem… Now I can see an argument that would say that the doctor should compensate for the patient’s ignorance but theres only so much a doctor can do. he can prescribe the medicine for a cure… if the patient doesn’t take it… its the patients fault!</p>
<p>Now lets say patient X was then prompted for his history by a sociable doctor and he readily provided the proper information. However the sociable doctor was unable to come up with a correct diagnosis. Patient X was left untreated. </p>
<p>So now say Patient B was prompted for his medical history and he had the same exact illness as patient X. Patient B is not as shy and understands that his wellness is dependent on how willing he is to cooperate. When the socially awkward doctor prompts him for his history he has no problem with sharing all of his past information. The socially awkward doctor then is able to make a diagnosis because he is more knowledgeable than the sociable doctor and read about that specific case in some journal/textbook or something. </p>
<p>Patient B gives his info to the sociable doctor and once again the sociable doctor fails to come up with a diagnosis because he is not as knowledgeable.</p>
<p>Now for those scenarios I described above isnt the socially awkward but more knowledgeable doctor a better doctor?</p>
<p>And please I’m trying to understand this so theres no need for ppl to reply belligerently.</p>