AJR Custom publishing of AJR articles and ARRS Cat. Course
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Forman, H. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Forman, H. P.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
AJR 2004; 183:883
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Associate Editor's Notebook

Can Policy Be Nonpartisan?

Howard P. Forman, MD, Associate Editor



 
Howard.Forman{at}Yale.edu

At a time of great political partisanship we, as professionals, have our own party-affiliation decisions and they can be difficult. However, when it comes to science, politics should not come into play. Many health care issues are considered in the political sphere, but these should always be considered independently and partisanship should not prevail. Certainly, a professional scientific peer-reviewed journal should not pay attention to politics or partisanship—or should it?

When I first began to edit the Policy Brief and At Press Time sections of the AJR, I did not think that my political leanings should be on display. Rather, a balanced explanation of the issues should be presented, and readers should then be able to filter that information with their own value system to come to their own conclusions. There are always two sides to every story, and good reporting can bring both sides into view. In consultation with Dr. Stanley, our editor in chief, and Keri Sperry, the indispensable director of communications for the American Roentgen Ray Society, I have sought to bring news and policy to you, the reader, without forcing (my) politics on the unwitting. I hope I have succeeded.

I will admit that it is not always easy. I would not want anyone to eventually decide that our journal (or any journal) has become politically aligned or partisan. In particular, one would hope that such an important source of education and science should not be definable as liberal or conservative, Republican or Democratic, in the same way that one might try to identify The Washington Post, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, or The Florida Times-Union. However, even science rests on interpretation and, ultimately, some opinion of what the results mean.

When it comes to the Policy Brief and At Press Time sections, I intentionally chose to report on topics that are important to our readers and their patients, and many of these topics are inherently political. In an election season with a trial lawyer as a vice presidential candidate, how can issues such as tort reform and malpractice costs not be seen as partisan? When we report on the shortfall in Medicare funding, are we highlighting a general failure of government or one of a particular party? When we seemingly advocate for increased payments from Medicare for our services, is this political?

There are also other challenges. Much of what we report seemingly points out our failings as physicians: Medical errors are abundant, health care delivery for minorities and women are seemingly suboptimal, and our own specialty is targeted as a source of increased health care spending. Surely, we are not in the business of "happy" news, but must our reporting be so sobering? I believe that we, as a profession, can best plan our future by recognizing the challenges that confront us. Further, I believe that recognition of representation of health care news in the lay press will drive our practices to be more competitive and responsive. This, then, is a real bias that I bring to these sections.

After nearly 18 months of editing and writing for these sections of the AJR, I have been pleased to bring in many outside experts to write on topics of importance to our field. Dr. Jonathan Berlin [1] has reported on tort reform, Dr. Fred A. Mettler, Jr. [2] has discussed the role of the radiologist in potential terrorist attacks, and Dr. Ruth Carlos [3] has written about training in health policy. In addition, we have been fortunate to have two members-in-training write for the Policy Brief section, including Dr. Gretchen E. Green [4], who introduced many of our members to our current and potential role in the American Medical Association, and Dr. David B. Larson [5], who presented a summary of graduate medical education funding in our field.

As we arrive at the conclusion of a long Presidential and congressional campaign period, politics cannot be ignored. Our ability to advance our mission—through education, research, and improvement in clinical care—is directly affected by decisions made by these elected officials. Many well-organized groups make great efforts to affect this process by promoting their agenda. It is important that our priorities are similarly heard. We can do this only if we become educated about the issues, and that includes hearing the facts and the spin. I hope that the Policy Brief and At Press Time sections are serving this purpose.

I invite any reader to contact me if you have a specific topic of interest or an opinion about something on which we have reported. The Policy Brief and At Press Time sections will succeed and thrive only if you, the readers, tell us how to make these sections better and valuable.


References
Top
References
 

  1. Berlin J. A review of the issues surrounding medical malpractice tort reform. AJR2003; 181(3):A5 –A6
  2. Mettler FA Jr. The radiologist's role in a terrorism attack. AJR 2004;182(1):A9 –A10
  3. Carlos R. The Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program: relevance for radiology. AJR2004; 183(2):A11 –A12
  4. Green GE. AMA policy: grassroots to global—what it is and how you can get involved. AJR2004; 183(1):A11 –A12
  5. Larson DB. Graduate medical education financing: its effect on radiologists at all career levels. AJR2004; 182(4):A9 –A10

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Forman, H. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Forman, H. P.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS