Codes and colleagues: Is there support for universal patient acceptance?
This article is a refinement of verbal reactions to O'Toole's and Corsino's remarks at a national conference on Access to Oral Health Care held at the headquarters of the American Dental Association in August 2005. The article consists of two parts, each part an answer to specific questions. The first is a reaction to Corsino's explanation of Patthoff's concept of Universal Patient Acceptance. Acceptance is supported and endorsed, and a case is made for the importance of a clear and accurate explanation of Universal Patient Acceptance, as it has a much greater likelihood of being embraced by dentists than "access" seems to have. A review of relevant codes of ethics in dentistry reveals mixed and uneven support for Universal Patient Acceptance. The second part of this article compares the way that the profession of psychology views access and acceptance with the way that dentistry seems to view them and concludes that, if dentistry is to remain a caring profession rather than a commercial enterprise, acceptance must be embraced.
Peltier
Bruce
B
Department of Dental Practice, Arthur A. Dugoni School of Dentistry, University of the Pacific, 2155 Webster Street, San Francisco, CA 94115, USA. bpeltier@pacific.edu
D000571:American Dental Association; D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D032781:Codes of Ethics; D004990:Ethics, Dental; D006297:Health Services Accessibility / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D007347:Insurance, Dental; D018579:Patient Selection / Q000941:ethics*; D011584:Psychology; D012955:Societies, Medical; D014481:United States; D019472:Universal Health Insurance