I spent 37 years practicing dentistry and there are dentists who are unethical who will try to convince you that you need things you do not really need, just so they can make a lot of money. There are also dentists who will avoid telling you what you really need to know, because they don't want you to be upset and go somewhere else. Both of these types are unethical.
Any dentist who would agree to "just do a cleaning" without knowing what oral conditions may be present that could jeopardize the patient's oral and general health is being unethical, and unprofessional.
And, no, a "hold harmless" clause does not protect the dentist from being sued for not treating to the standard of care. It simply does not.
If you have recent x-rays from another dentist, then it should be a simple matter to have duplicates sent to the new dentist.
It would be fair to pay a nominal fee to the dentist for the time and trouble to forward those records, and it would also be fair to pay the new dentist for the time and trouble to evaluate these records. Often, a dentist will forward a note to the new dentist, advising of areas of concern that while not necessarily being treated, are being closely monitored.
It takes a little time to get everyone up to speed. The ethical dentist takes that time, and the reasonable patient pays for that time.
The patient whose main concern is avoiding fees will eventually find the appropriate dentist, if he looks long enough. He will also get exactly what he's paying for, which can in the long run, be a lot more expensive and painful than seeking out conscientious care at a reasonable fee.
|