Letters to the editor

Dr. Patterson,

Thank you for your excellent editorial in the July issue regarding the recent AAO policy statements.

As indicated, just 15% of physicians were members of the American Medical Association in 2011, whereas 75% were members in the 1950s. It didn’t happen overnight; it happened incrementally, one divisive organizational policy decision at a time. I, like many others, left the AMA several years ago after many years of membership — though it would be more accurate to say the AMA left me.

In the November 2019 issue of EyeNet, Chief Medical Editor Ruth Williams, MD, penned #ThisIsMyLane regarding the Academy Board of Trustees’ unanimous endorsement of the American College of Physicians policy statement labeling gun violence a “public health crisis.” In March 2020 EyeNet, David Parke II, MD, AAO’s CEO, thoughtfully wrote, “How Wide Is the Academy’s Lane?” outlining the process by which issues become policy statements (the Board of Trustees votes on it). Less clear is the subjective process for determining which issues deserve to be “in their lane” and elevated for consideration.

You raised two recent issues on which the AAO has issued urgent/immediate declarations: COVID-19 and the call for “all ophthalmologists [to] cease providing any treatment other than urgent or emergent care immediately,” and the AAO’s #NotOneMoreEye statement (complete with media toolkit) where the AAO called for “an immediate end to law enforcement’s use of rubber bullets against protestors.”

As of my writing, we await the AAO policy statement and urgent/immediate declaration (and media toolkit) on the recent intentional use of powerful lasers by “protestors” to disable and/or blind law enforcement officers sworn to uphold our laws. I expect the AAO to decide this is “in their lane,” too. But we wait.

However thoughtful the deliberations by their organization’s leaders, rank-and-file members of professional organizations will disproportionately dise0ngage over issues with which they disagree more than they will engage on issues with which they agree. Ask a current AMA member, if you can still find one.
— Scott G. Eccarius, MD, Eccarius Eye Clinic, Rapid City, S.D.

Dr. Patterson,

The positions that the AAO has taken on public policy (dictating nationwide practice closures for COVID-19, condemning rubber bullets and so on) are exercises in political correctness. But they risk alienating members, and they’re just not necessary. I was relieved to learn that at least some of my colleagues agree.

The AAO is an important source of education for its members and is one of our greatest advocates in Washington, D.C. I hope that it will continue to be effective in those roles.
— John D. Kirk, MD, Kirk Eye Center, Loveland, Colo.

Dr. Patterson,

I appreciated your insightful editorial in your July issue.

I am one who has long since dropped my AMA and CMA memberships, in spite of the benefits they offer, because of their unfortunate political stances, which clearly do not represent me. I sincerely hope the AAO and ASCRS do not follow suit.
— Larry Eninger, MD, Pacific Vision Medical Center, Crescent City, Calif.