[shri]

The first response was from a Dr who saw the flaws in Dr Robert Law's logic.

I read with interest Dr Robert Law's letter (South China Morning Post, August 31) regarding charges for different classes of beds in private hospitals.
He said the pricing structure enabled patients to have ''real choices''. I interpret the situation differently. The pricing (or over-pricing) for the luxury of a first-class bed, just like for a Rolex watch, a Tai Tam address and first-class air travel, is above all a matter of status symbols. It is a matter of choice only if you can afford it.


The pricing policy is a business decision aimed at profitability, and is justified because business is business. Dr Law stated that it was a case of supply and demand; that much I agree.

However, Dr Law's letter opened up a can of worms. We can see why private hospitals and airlines want to charge exorbitantly for their first-class clients, but what are the justifications for doctors to surcharge their patients when they stay in first-class beds?

In theory, doctors treat all patients equally, rich or poor. Then why charge those in third-class $800 per day for hospital visits, but those in first-class $3,000? Why charge $10,000 for surgery for third-class patients, but $30,000 for first-class patients? Are we sending the message that we provide better service to first-class patients? Unlike airlines and private hospitals, where surcharges in luxury classes may be needed to subsidise losses in the overall operation, for doctors it is matter of making enough money - or a lot more. Making $800 per patient per day for hospital visits or $10,000 for a couple of hours in the operating theatre is not exactly charity work.

It goes to show that doctors are no different from everyone else, in that given the opportunity they will want to make as much money as possible. And it is possible because patients and insurance companies let us get away with it.

DR FENG CHI-SHUN
Causeway Bay