Doctor medallion upgrades ?
Dec 17, 2019, 5:26 am
#31
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: YEG
Programs: Bonvoy Plat, Hilton Diamond, KLM Silver
Posts: 166
Dec 17, 2019, 5:27 am
#32
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: YEG
Programs: Bonvoy Plat, Hilton Diamond, KLM Silver
Posts: 166
I’ve never indicated to Delta what I do for a living but I’m not aware of, nor would I ever expect, any special privileges. I’ve had a few colleagues that have assisted with passengers falling ill in flight over the years and they’ve received some compensation for their efforts after the fact but I can assure you there’s no secret arrangement between Delta and MDs.
Dec 17, 2019, 5:37 am
#33
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NY/CT
Programs: DL PM, Marriott PM
Posts: 263
But how would Delta know you were a medical doctor? There are plenty of professionals who have obtained their Doctorate (PhD) who use Dr. in their title, who are not MD's.
Dec 17, 2019, 5:53 am
#34
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: I 35 south bound, finally stopped
Programs: LT Plt, 4mm, *A GLD, burned out medical provider, executing our estate plan
Posts: 1,667
Now off topic sorta.
If I had to do it over again, I would definitely not put MD there. Being fairly old school my board certifications are such that for emergencies I can take care of a 1 day old to 100+. I do agree that new grads are very very reluctant to work out of their specialties and age ranges. Except for a few notable specialties, this has started to amplify since about 1990, in my specialties.
After my first 6 or so of these, I too "retired". Now I also walk slowly if they ask a second time. A quick search of the medico-legal literature agrees that the Good Samaritan law probably only applies to being on the ground in the US. In all other venues in the sky the laws appear murky at best. Most recently, in October, I responded to the second call. An elderly gentlemen was a little hypoxic. Domestic AA on that flight had minimalist equipment and a pulse oximeter, which was the best piece of equipment they had. He got better and we did not divert. I had to fill out a form but there was no ground communication with a medical call center.
two pertinent abstracts
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30864477
Most medical practitioners are not specifically trained to diagnose or manage in-flight medical incidents, yet there may occur a moral obligation to do so when least expected. We felt that knowledge of the frequency of emergency versus non-serious medical incidents, in addition to the clinical spectrum of incidents most often encountered, would be of interest to medical practitioners and, in particular, critical care physicians, who happen to find themselves asked to assist with such events. To this end we collaborated with the Department of Medical Services of a major Australian airline to define the incidence, severity, and type of all in-flight medical events encountered over the course of a year’s flights. We audited in-flight medical data collected over a continuous 12-month period, which covered 131,890 international and domestic flight sectors transporting more than 27 million passengers. There was an average of 296 medical events per month (3555 in total) making the per-flight incidence of a medical event approximately 1:40 (2.7%). Of these in-flight incidents, 915 (26%) were graded as emergencies, with the commonest descriptors of such incidents being either loss of consciousness (37%) or a suspected cardiovascular event (12%). Six of these 915 emergencies proved fatal. Twenty-one flights were diverted due to medical incidents (<0.016% of all flights), with 52% of these attributed to suspected cardiac events. In this series, medical in-flight events were recorded in approximately one in 40 flights, whereas medical emergencies occurred in approximately one in 150 flights.
Doctor in the sky: Medico-legal issues during in-flight emergencies
https://doi.org/10.1177/0968533217705693
More people are travelling by air and in-flight medical emergencies are becoming more common. Some in-flight emergencies require assistance from passenger doctors who act as good Samaritans in the sky. Their liability and the associated medico-legal issues of providing assistance in mid-flight emergencies are unknown. Although provisions exist in theory about good Samaritans on the ground, it is unclear to what extent these doctrines are applicable to good Samaritans in the sky. This article examines the obligations, liability and legal protection of doctors when acting as good Samaritans in mid-flight emergencies, regardless of their nationalities. It examines the jurisdiction, existing legislations, case law in the United Kingdom and compares with their equivalence in the United States and to some extent, with the legal provisions in France. In addition to in-flight emergencies, this article reviews airlines’ liability for injuries sustained by passengers during flight. It is concluded that doctors’ liability is unclear and uncertain, their legal protection is inadequate and inconsistent; airlines’ liability is restricted by the courts. Reforms proposed include legislative enactment and extension of commercial airliners’ insurance to accord the deficient legal protection.
Dec 17, 2019, 7:13 am
#35
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah, DL DM since inception, 3+ MM, HH Gold, SPG-Gold
Programs: DL, UA, AA, HH, SPG, HH, Hertz, Avis
Posts: 1,839
Reminds me of a friend of mine who is a professor and PhD in aeronautic engineering, who's assistant one time had him issued a ticket in the name of "Dr. "James Jones"". When a medical emergency happened on the flight, the FA came too him and asked "Dr Jones, we have a medical emergency could you please help us" to which he replied "I am not a medical doctor but a PhD", to which the FA responded (according to my friend) "So you are not a REAL doctor!" allegedly so loud so the the whole cabin could hear it. This annoyed my friend to no end, as he considered a "PhD" to be a more "real doctor" than a mere "MD"!! (and the assistant was instructed never to do that again!)
Dec 17, 2019, 8:10 am
#36
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,857
Time to start introducing myself to Delta as CMK10 juris DOCTOR
Dec 17, 2019, 8:25 am
#37
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 13
Maybe this is a side issue, but MD is not part of a name, it's a designation (credential / certification) - nor is Dr. or PhD (or any of my "letters") and really should not be on her Delta profile, tickets, or REAL ID compliant identification. I guess great for you (her) that she was able to add it to her profile when she joined, but.... it should really not be considered part of the name at all, as it is revocable, can expire, etc.
Dec 17, 2019, 9:09 am
#39
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 483
I'm an NP with experience in ED, urgent care and IM. I'm ACLS and PALS certified. I'm always worried about litigation and it sometimes makes me wary of offering to help, but I like to do so.
I have an experience in this regard: we were flying home on Turkish business class IST-JFK a few months ago. There was a lady in front with us that was having some chest pain. There apparently was a physician on board but he never came to help. I wanted to break the box to at least use the stethoscope to do a quick heart and lung exam after taking a history and decide whether or not we needed to divert. The FA (from Turkey) was rude and didn't understand what an NP was. She thought it was just a nurse. She, under no uncertain terms, let me know we did not need to divert and she "knew" it was an anxiety attack. She finally allowed me to break the medical box open. It ended up being anxiety and I had her self-administer an anxiolytic after taking a full history and finding out she just had a huge cardiac workup a few months prior. Still, the experience was annoying. It was also annoying that I was offered no sort of compensation, even though I missed dessert and my meal got cold. I wanted to experience Turkish business completely and this detracted from that.
To your point above, I think it is also annoying when an MD in an unrelated specialty such as radiology, dermatology, urology, etc who has little to no experience in acute care tries to evaluate the patient over me. I'm far more qualified to evaluate and treat the patient than someone performing Mohs procedures or cystoscopies all day.
Dec 17, 2019, 9:12 am
#40
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 483
Having MD after my name has done nothing for me in terms of order of upgrades. And OW carriers don't appear to know I am, even though when I signed up decades ago, that's what I put.
Now off topic sorta.
If I had to do it over again, I would definitely not put MD there. Being fairly old school my board certifications are such that for emergencies I can take care of a 1 day old to 100+. I do agree that new grads are very very reluctant to work out of their specialties and age ranges. Except for a few notable specialties, this has started to amplify since about 1990, in my specialties.
After my first 6 or so of these, I too "retired". Now I also walk slowly if they ask a second time. A quick search of the medico-legal literature agrees that the Good Samaritan law probably only applies to being on the ground in the US. In all other venues in the sky the laws appear murky at best. Most recently, in October, I responded to the second call. An elderly gentlemen was a little hypoxic. Domestic AA on that flight had minimalist equipment and a pulse oximeter, which was the best piece of equipment they had. He got better and we did not divert. I had to fill out a form but there was no ground communication with a medical call center.
two pertinent abstracts
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30864477
Most medical practitioners are not specifically trained to diagnose or manage in-flight medical incidents, yet there may occur a moral obligation to do so when least expected. We felt that knowledge of the frequency of emergency versus non-serious medical incidents, in addition to the clinical spectrum of incidents most often encountered, would be of interest to medical practitioners and, in particular, critical care physicians, who happen to find themselves asked to assist with such events. To this end we collaborated with the Department of Medical Services of a major Australian airline to define the incidence, severity, and type of all in-flight medical events encountered over the course of a year’s flights. We audited in-flight medical data collected over a continuous 12-month period, which covered 131,890 international and domestic flight sectors transporting more than 27 million passengers. There was an average of 296 medical events per month (3555 in total) making the per-flight incidence of a medical event approximately 1:40 (2.7%). Of these in-flight incidents, 915 (26%) were graded as emergencies, with the commonest descriptors of such incidents being either loss of consciousness (37%) or a suspected cardiovascular event (12%). Six of these 915 emergencies proved fatal. Twenty-one flights were diverted due to medical incidents (<0.016% of all flights), with 52% of these attributed to suspected cardiac events. In this series, medical in-flight events were recorded in approximately one in 40 flights, whereas medical emergencies occurred in approximately one in 150 flights.
Doctor in the sky: Medico-legal issues during in-flight emergencies
https://doi.org/10.1177/0968533217705693
More people are travelling by air and in-flight medical emergencies are becoming more common. Some in-flight emergencies require assistance from passenger doctors who act as good Samaritans in the sky. Their liability and the associated medico-legal issues of providing assistance in mid-flight emergencies are unknown. Although provisions exist in theory about good Samaritans on the ground, it is unclear to what extent these doctrines are applicable to good Samaritans in the sky. This article examines the obligations, liability and legal protection of doctors when acting as good Samaritans in mid-flight emergencies, regardless of their nationalities. It examines the jurisdiction, existing legislations, case law in the United Kingdom and compares with their equivalence in the United States and to some extent, with the legal provisions in France. In addition to in-flight emergencies, this article reviews airlines’ liability for injuries sustained by passengers during flight. It is concluded that doctors’ liability is unclear and uncertain, their legal protection is inadequate and inconsistent; airlines’ liability is restricted by the courts. Reforms proposed include legislative enactment and extension of commercial airliners’ insurance to accord the deficient legal protection.
Now off topic sorta.
If I had to do it over again, I would definitely not put MD there. Being fairly old school my board certifications are such that for emergencies I can take care of a 1 day old to 100+. I do agree that new grads are very very reluctant to work out of their specialties and age ranges. Except for a few notable specialties, this has started to amplify since about 1990, in my specialties.
After my first 6 or so of these, I too "retired". Now I also walk slowly if they ask a second time. A quick search of the medico-legal literature agrees that the Good Samaritan law probably only applies to being on the ground in the US. In all other venues in the sky the laws appear murky at best. Most recently, in October, I responded to the second call. An elderly gentlemen was a little hypoxic. Domestic AA on that flight had minimalist equipment and a pulse oximeter, which was the best piece of equipment they had. He got better and we did not divert. I had to fill out a form but there was no ground communication with a medical call center.
two pertinent abstracts
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30864477
Most medical practitioners are not specifically trained to diagnose or manage in-flight medical incidents, yet there may occur a moral obligation to do so when least expected. We felt that knowledge of the frequency of emergency versus non-serious medical incidents, in addition to the clinical spectrum of incidents most often encountered, would be of interest to medical practitioners and, in particular, critical care physicians, who happen to find themselves asked to assist with such events. To this end we collaborated with the Department of Medical Services of a major Australian airline to define the incidence, severity, and type of all in-flight medical events encountered over the course of a year’s flights. We audited in-flight medical data collected over a continuous 12-month period, which covered 131,890 international and domestic flight sectors transporting more than 27 million passengers. There was an average of 296 medical events per month (3555 in total) making the per-flight incidence of a medical event approximately 1:40 (2.7%). Of these in-flight incidents, 915 (26%) were graded as emergencies, with the commonest descriptors of such incidents being either loss of consciousness (37%) or a suspected cardiovascular event (12%). Six of these 915 emergencies proved fatal. Twenty-one flights were diverted due to medical incidents (<0.016% of all flights), with 52% of these attributed to suspected cardiac events. In this series, medical in-flight events were recorded in approximately one in 40 flights, whereas medical emergencies occurred in approximately one in 150 flights.
Doctor in the sky: Medico-legal issues during in-flight emergencies
https://doi.org/10.1177/0968533217705693
More people are travelling by air and in-flight medical emergencies are becoming more common. Some in-flight emergencies require assistance from passenger doctors who act as good Samaritans in the sky. Their liability and the associated medico-legal issues of providing assistance in mid-flight emergencies are unknown. Although provisions exist in theory about good Samaritans on the ground, it is unclear to what extent these doctrines are applicable to good Samaritans in the sky. This article examines the obligations, liability and legal protection of doctors when acting as good Samaritans in mid-flight emergencies, regardless of their nationalities. It examines the jurisdiction, existing legislations, case law in the United Kingdom and compares with their equivalence in the United States and to some extent, with the legal provisions in France. In addition to in-flight emergencies, this article reviews airlines’ liability for injuries sustained by passengers during flight. It is concluded that doctors’ liability is unclear and uncertain, their legal protection is inadequate and inconsistent; airlines’ liability is restricted by the courts. Reforms proposed include legislative enactment and extension of commercial airliners’ insurance to accord the deficient legal protection.
Dec 17, 2019, 9:12 am
#41
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: Delta Gold, Marriott Platinum, Former Amtrak Select, Former Hilton Gold
Posts: 422
My success rate with this is 0/2. Both times the person in the middle said they had an issue with the window seat due to claustrophobia but would take the aisle if we wanted to sit together
Dec 17, 2019, 9:15 am
#42
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ORD, MBS
Programs: UA Plat., 1.52 MM
Posts: 2,053
Dec 17, 2019, 9:43 am
#43
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CMI (Champaign, IL)
Programs: AA, WN, UA
Posts: 268
I know I am going OT but I have always found it interesting that in the UK, doctors who become surgeons no longer refer to themselves as "Dr X" but revert to "Mr/Mrs/Ms/Mx X"; and dentists in the UK are just "Mr/Mrs/Ms/Mx" (presumably because they are "dental surgeons"), whereas in Hong Kong dentists all seem to call themselves "Dr". So my brother, who is a maxillofacial surgeon in the UK, which requires qualifications both as a doctor and a dentist (he spent 13 years at university), is just "Mr". Mind you, although his prefix is very ordinary, he does have an entire alphabet of suffixes!
https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/patient-car...a-surgeon/#Why
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1119265/
From the first link: "The training of surgeons until the mid-19th century was different. They did not have to go to university to gain a degree; instead they usually served as an apprentice to a surgeon. Afterwards they took an examination. In London, after 1745, this was conducted by the Surgeons' Company and after 1800 by The Royal College of Surgeons. If successful they were awarded a diploma, not a degree, therefore they were unable to call themselves 'Doctor', and stayed instead with the title 'Mr'."
From the second link: "Surgeons became so proud to be distinguished from physicians that the title of Mr became a badge of honour."
Dec 17, 2019, 2:04 pm
#44
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA Frmr AA Plat AW Plat Frmr UA 1K Frmr HGP Plat now just UA 1MM/1P
Posts: 320
It isn’t the name or profession. It is the gender
I have had many situations where my wife and I were traveling on the same flight but under different PNRs - but she would get upgraded and I would not.
We we’re both 1k at the time, although she was “1k lite” under some definitions. Tickets were identical cost, purchased at the same approximate time.
She does dress a lot better ( and looks better).
i didn’t mind since a reverse upgrade situation would have gone to her anyway.
We we’re both 1k at the time, although she was “1k lite” under some definitions. Tickets were identical cost, purchased at the same approximate time.
She does dress a lot better ( and looks better).
i didn’t mind since a reverse upgrade situation would have gone to her anyway.
Dec 17, 2019, 5:18 pm
#45
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ATL Lost Luggage
Programs: Kettle with Kryptonium Medallion Tags
Posts: 10,364