Life, liberty, and the pursuit of lipo
Cosmetic surgery is drifting from a cash-up-front business into a credit market
that accommodates -- and sometimes specifically recruits -- people who thought
they couldn't afford it. The pitch is simple: Doesn't every American deserve to
be beautiful?
by Ellen Barry
The lady in the commercial is thin, and professional, and she has good news.
"Wouldn't it be great to be the best you could possibly be?" she says, with
the savage enthusiasm unique to daytime infomercials. "You bet it would. But
cosmetic surgery is only for the rich and famous, isn't it?
"Not anymore. Thanks to our IMAGES-1 program, you can now have a
complete cosmetic procedure for no money down and payments as low as $38 a
week. That's right -- your choice of breast, liposuction, or facial procedures
for no money down and payments as low as $38 a week. You can be the person you
always wanted to be, for no money down and payments as low as $38 a week."
Surprise, surprise. We associate cosmetic surgery with the Joan Riverses of
this world: wealthy women throwing cash in the face of advancing physical
decay. But if that stereotype was ever accurate, it isn't now. Average patients
are both younger and poorer than you think. According to figures published in
the 1992 American Society for Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons Guide to
Cosmetic Surgery, the most recent statistics available, 30 percent of
cosmetic-surgery patients had a household income of less than $25,000 a year
(by way of comparison, the nationwide median family income that year was
$35,700). Another 35 percent earned household incomes between $25,000 and
$50,000 a year.
The specialty has undergone serious changes since the 1970s, when it was a
genteel, word-of-mouth, cash-up-front affair. Health-care reform has driven
scores of doctors (not only plastic surgeons, but dermatologists, gynecologists
-- even the odd psychiatrist) away from HMOs and into lucrative
cosmetic-surgery practices. Because of the increased competition, advertising
-- which was actually illegal 20 years ago -- suddenly became a professional
imperative. More people, and younger people, are going under the knife: over
the past four years, the number of cosmetic procedures has increased
77 percent, according to statistics from the American Academy of Cosmetic
Surgery. And the two fastest-growing procedures over the last five years --
breast augmentation and liposuction -- are the two most popular among
19-to-34-year-olds. Particularly breast augmentation: nearly two-thirds of
patients are between 19 and 34, and the number of operations is increasing 40
percent a year.
A race is on to capture this burgeoning market -- and to generate a brand-new
client base. The people who are working hardest at this task are not doctors at
all, but the entrepreneurs behind a new breed of financing plan that extends
loans to patients who can't afford to pay any other way. According to the folks
at Jayhawk Medical Acceptance, a Houston-based plastic-surgery financing
company, the stakes are huge: Jayhawk president Doug Theodore says the credit
market for plastic surgery could be four or five times the size of the cash
market.
The credit market is also distinct from the cash market in a very human way.
Theodore identifies the credit customer -- the patient he is bringing into the
operating room -- as a woman in her "very late 20s," earning "in the high 20s,"
possibly with a "C" credit rating. She is getting the procedure as an
"investment." What is remarkable about this woman is how normal she is: not
rich, not famous, not ugly, not old. Welcome to the democratization of plastic
surgery.
The people who stand to benefit from this trend, it would seem, are the
plastic surgeons who do the work. But most surgeons interviewed for this story
are not inclined to take pride in what Theodore calls "market-building"; they
almost seem worried that Americans will start getting too much plastic
surgery. They look at the plans, at the daytime TV ads, at the bulging patient
dockets, and see nothing but disaster.
The idea of elective plastic surgery as a normal consumer choice has always
been a peculiarly American one. In her book Venus Envy: A History of
Cosmetic Surgery (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), the University of
Kentucky historian Elizabeth Haiken explains that plastic surgery developed
around the same time as trench warfare: in the early days of World War I, a
coalition of American, British, German, and French doctors learned, quickly,
out of necessity, how to reconstruct the faces of injured soldiers. These
pioneering surgeons returned home as a species of war hero, but the British and
French doctors stopped practicing their newfound skill, in part because they
got the message that their nations didn't need more than a handful of plastic
surgeons.
America was different. By the beginning of World War II, America had twice as
many plastic surgeons as the rest of the world combined. When Haiken began
research for her book, she wondered why this was: were Americans that much more
invested in physical appearance? Were they richer? Were they vainer?
Ultimately, after scrutinizing decades' worth of medical records and
marketing material on cosmetic surgery, Haiken found an answer: unlike
Europeans, Americans weren't resigned to what God had given them. Not only did
they believe deeply in the possibility of personal transformation, but they
were willing to pay for it -- even investing money they couldn't really spare.
Reading through medical records, she ran into letter after letter from young
women who had saved up for their nose jobs, or who had agreed to pay off the
bill in small increments.
"They're nurses, teachers, and factory workers -- a range of low-paid, mostly
female occupations. Some of them, of course, want to be movie stars," Haiken
says. "But most of them just want a better job. So it's always been connected
to the idea of social mobility."
From the moment the Federal Trade Commission made it legal for doctors to
advertise, in 1978, marketing campaigns have sounded the same theme: social
mobility -- especially through competitiveness in the workplace -- or at least
self-improvement. And, to be fair, generations of surveys have suggested that
the procedures tend to deliver, at least in the eyes of the patients: in the
1960s, a Johns Hopkins study found that 85 percent of face-lift patients
had an enhanced sense of well-being after their surgery, and 25 percent
said they felt their careers had benefited. (And if there is any question about
the translation of good looks into salary, that relationship can also be
quantified: a 1993 study performed at Michigan State University showed that men
and women who rated "below average" in attractiveness earned 15 percent
less than those rated above average.)
So the sales pitch is pretty simple.
"It's a self-improvement decision, so you have people from all socioeconomic
groups deciding to have elective procedures," says Anne Tynion, president of a
brand-new financing company called Unicorn Financial Services. "There's
research that says the number one reason [people undergo cosmetic surgery] is
for self-improvement. That, to me, is not a luxury. That is a life-quality
decision. It's a real issue for the job, for their personal self-esteem, for
all aspects of their life."
Seen this way, surgery is anything but decadent. Here's Jerry Powell,
president of Cooperative Images, a cosmetic-surgery financing plan operating
out of East Stroudsberg, Pennsylvania: "It affects so many different things in
their life. They're more confident, they have better jobs. . . .
We think that it is a necessity for some people."
Ten years ago, our Jane Doe was expected to pay cash up front for this
"necessity"; most cosmetic surgeons wouldn't even accept credit cards. Now, if
she doesn't have the cash for a $4000 liposuction procedure, or a $5000 breast
augmentation, or a $10,000 face-lift, she has a vast array of credit options
available to her. And she uses them. Ted Schlegel, who operates the MediCredit
financing plan out of Los Angeles, says he'd estimate that half of all cosmetic
procedures are now paid for with some form of financing. Although doctors
interviewed for this story say the number is lower, the proliferation of
cosmetic-surgery finance plans out there -- I found at least a half-dozen
companies dedicated to cosmetic and other elective surgery -- tells its own
story.
Some plans, like the Colorado-based MediCredit and Tynion's Unicorn Financial
Services (which grew out of a Harley-Davidson motorcycle financing plan), are
offered to the patient by the doctor after the surgery is set up. In these
arrangements, the finance companies buy the contracts from the doctors and
space the payments out over time at an annual interest rate that can range,
depending on the plan and the applicant, from about 9 percent (not far
above the prime lending rate) to about 20 percent (higher than most credit
cards). But if Jane Doe has already maxed out her Visa, she might get refused
-- the ASPRS's in-house plan, for instance, approves only 40 percent of
applicants.
Other plans are more liberal -- and more aggressive. It's possible that Jane
wasn't even looking for a plastic surgeon until one day, while she was watching
Jerry Springer, she saw an advertisement for Cooperative Images or
Jayhawk, which assured her that no matter how far out of reach she thought
cosmetic surgery was, she could get her liposuction without paying any money up
front. These plans operate a little differently from the ones offered in
doctors' offices. Not unlike HMOs, they sign up a slate of physicians who are
willing to work for a significantly discounted payment. In return, the
companies take over the onus of soliciting business, promising to flood the
office with fully prepared patients. (As a test, I applied to Jayhawk over the
Internet; within three days I was approved for a breast augmentation at
14.8 percent APR, which would leave me with two years' worth of payments
of about $48 a week, not including finance charges.)
To Doug Theodore, Jayhawk is a pioneering company that stands to do for
cosmetic surgery "what GMAC financing did for automobiles" -- in other words,
make the product available to every American, turning what was seen as a luxury
into an understood necessity, and thereby boosting sales sky-high. So far, the
financing plans appear to be doing their job, at least according to their
executives: Jayhawk, which grew out of a bankrupt used-car financing company,
has arranged 10,000 surgeries in a little less than two years, according to
Theodore. Jerry Powell, the president of Cooperative Images, which was formerly
a home financing company, estimates that his three-year-old referral service
has set up 12,000 consultations and is scheduling surgeries for 400 or 500 new
patients a month -- of whom 70 percent were not even interested in
cosmetic surgery before seeing the company's television commercial, according
to his research. "Our biggest problem is controlling volume," Powell says.
But despite the promise of an untold wealth of customers, not everyone is
delighted by this development. Surgeons contacted about plastic-surgery
financing plans expressed serious anxiety about ceding control of their
practice to -- and, more broadly, about the profession falling into the hands
of -- people one doctor referred to, not pleasantly, as "MBA types."
Used-car salesmen don't take the Hippocratic oath, after all.
Board-certified plastic surgeons go through 15 years of training -- more than
any specialists except brain surgeons, says William LoVerme, a Newton surgeon
who is president of the Massachusetts Society of Plastic Surgeons. It may seem
strange to speak of ethics in a field where invasive procedures are performed
on healthy people, but cosmetic surgeons have always reserved one important
right: to decide who should have plastic surgery and who should not.
It's common, for instance, for a doctor to refuse to perform liposuction on a
patient who is too thin, or who is simply overweight, rather than having the
disproportionate, localized fat bulges liposuction was designed to remove.
Bruce Shack, an assistant secretary for the American Society for Plastic and
Reconstructive Surgeons who practices at the Vanderbilt Medical Center, in
Nashville, Tennessee, estimates that he turns away 30 percent of the
patients who come to him requesting liposuction. James Baker, a former
president of the American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS) who has
been practicing in Winter Hill, Florida, for 27 years, puts it this way: "We
don't want to see someone overweight with a bad ticker who comes in here and
wants to look like Gina Lollobrigida."
So far, so good. But there are a lot of reasons doctors might reject a
patient, and some of them aren't medical. Some of them are what you might call
social. The ASAPS code of ethics requires physicians to avoid soliciting
business from a patient if "the physical, emotional, or mental state or degree
of education is such that the person could not exercise reasonable judgment in
employing an aesthetic plastic surgeon." In other words, uneducated patients
might not know what's good for them.
The same might be said of poor patients. If a would-be patient isn't paying
for the procedure with discretionary income, then a doctor may decide she is
what is known as a "bad candidate." For Baker, any doctor who fails to consider
a patient's ability to pay is on shaky ethical ground. The reason, he says, is
that "this isn't somebody who has been burned. This is someone who looks good
and wants to look better." In other words, cosmetic surgery is a luxury
item, and Baker thinks doctors should keep that in mind.
"I think we have a moral obligation to our patients. I ask if they have
children," Baker says. "We want a patient to benefit from the operation not
only from the aesthetic viewpoint, but also not to the detriment of other
members of the family -- for example, the children. Mom will look better in a
bathing suit at the beach, but the kids might not be able to take that special
class or something."
Baker's stance is relatively hard line; plenty of doctors say they don't have
any way of knowing how much a patient earns, or how she or he is paying. But
most have given some thought to the matter.
"If someone is stretched and going to sell the family jewels, it's really
inappropriate. I like to sleep at night," says Robert Cooper, a New York
surgeon who, remarkably, gives an interview over a headset while cutting into
the breast of an anesthetized patient. He offers this parallel: "About a year
or two years ago, there was that nine-year-old girl who went flying across the
country to set a record." He's talking about Jessica Dubroff, who crashed and
died. "She went out with her flight instructor, and he [should have known]
better. It's not about being patronizing. People go to you for caring."
These doctors say financial plans like Jayhawk and Cooperative Images -- which
act as referral services -- carry the hidden dangers of malpractice and
hard-sell hucksterism. First, they sign up doctors who are willing to accept
less money for higher volume. Second, they spend lavishly on mass-market
advertising, which still strikes many doctors as ethically suspect. And third,
since there's no asset to repossess, the loans are unsecured, so anyone who
defaults stands to go through a painful collection process.
"Wouldn't you like to have a 500SL Mercedes convertible?" says Baker. "So
would I, but neither of us has one. Why? Because we can't afford it. We could
get it on credit, but then we suddenly realize we have a tax payment, and then
your husband gets sick, and guess where your Mercedes goes? Bye-bye. Guess
where your face-lift goes? It can't go anywhere. Because you're strapped in.
You don't have an asset that you can sell to make enough money to eat. That's
the moral problem I have with this."
"I'm not going to prostitute what I've spent 27 years doing for a little
cash," he adds. "If my practice was dependent on something like that, I might
as well go sell used cars."
These qualms are not purely altruistic; as many doctors see it, patients who
have trouble paying for their surgery are also more likely to be dissatisfied.
Dissatisfied patients are more likely to sue (according to LoVerme, the average
cosmetic surgeon is sued every two years). Sometimes, dissatisfied patients do
worse than sue; this year, in reaction to a series of attacks on plastic
surgeons over the past decade, the ASPRS added, as a perk of membership, a
half-million-dollar life insurance policy covering fatal attacks in surgeons'
offices.
So doctors are always on the lookout for "bad candidates," and bad candidates
are sometimes the ones who put an irrational amount of money at stake when they
sign up for their surgery. As LoVerme puts it, "The higher percentage of yearly
income that you're paying, the higher your expectations."
And, as cosmetic surgeons know perhaps better than anyone else, unreasonable
expectations can get everyone into trouble.
When you bring these ethical scruples under the high beams, they begin to sound
pretty paternalistic. That's certainly what the finance-plan entrepreneurs will
argue, and so will the doctors who signed up with the finance plans. If poor or
debt-ridden people are able to buy cars they can't pay cash for, why shouldn't
they be able to get a nose job they can't pay cash for? And if cosmetic surgery
is proven to enhance your career so much, why should doctors deny their
services to the people who need career boosts the most?
Good question, says John Barnett, a Dallas surgeon who sometimes refers to
himself as the "Sam Walton of breast augs." Doctors who steer clear of credit
patients, he says, are straight-out elitists -- holdovers from a time when
cosmetic surgery was for the pampered wives of the upper class. Needless to
say, this is not Barnett's constituency.
"I'm not ashamed to say that I've never had a carriage-trade practice," says
Barnett, who is looking at a thank-you picture from a centerfold as he talks on
the phone. "I do a lot of people in the entertainment industry, anyway. Most of
these folks are just working folks. You don't get Lady Astor's pet horse."
He sounds like someone who's accustomed to defending his practice. Over the
years, Barnett has strained against the ethics of the plastic-surgery
establishment, even as those ethics have shifted. Nearly 20 years ago, Barnett
was quoted in a newspaper article and faced a barrage of criticism from
colleagues who felt that giving the interview amounted to advertising; a few
years later, he says, "the same guys who were screaming as loud as a pig caught
in a gate were advertising in Texas Monthly."
Now, by filling up his schedule with Jayhawk's credit patients, Barnett has
once again found himself on the wrong side of the profession's establishment.
Part of the problem, he says, is that cosmetic surgeons are just snobs about
whom they want to serve. He uses the word prissy.
"Some of the doctors tend to look at [credit] patients as less than human," he
says. "If you try to treat everyone, some people are very sensitive at the
lower pole of the economic status, and you have to make them feel
comfortable."
Barnett's democratic indignation is shared by Kate Altork, a Palm Beach
psychotherapist who consults, sometimes through surgeons' offices, with pre-
and post-op cosmetic-surgery patients. "If a woman who makes 500 grand a
year can have a surgery, why shouldn't a woman who makes 20 grand?" she
says. "A lot of discretionary items are considered mandatory. We can't be moral
cops for people. That's not our job."
Doug Theodore says cosmetic surgeons will have to adapt Barnett's philosophy
if they want to survive. To doctors' objections that they might sacrifice
quality of care for the sake of volume, Theodore points out that "Sam Walton
built an empire on volume." He also says it's the young doctors who will make
it, in part because they acknowledge something that has been true all along:
that they are really entrepreneurs.
"We're finding more and more physicians, younger physicians in their mid-30s,
who are becoming astute businessmen, which has not always been the case," says
Theodore. "The days of a doctor being a healer and researcher are -- not gone,
thank goodness -- but today's environment allows a doctor to become a
businessman. And a doctor who has made the decision to go into cosmetic surgery
has decided to be a businessman."
Cosmetic surgery has always teetered between the world of commerce and the
world of medicine, but surgeons held onto the serene conviction that they fell
to one side of the line. If there was one act that asserted their membership in
the Hippocratic club, it was turning down business for ethical reasons. If a
doctor sent someone away because the surgery appeared to present too much of a
financial strain, that meant that the doctor still knew best. A line in the
sand separated business from medical practice.
That line has been drifting for some time, but now that doctors are putting
their business in the hands of professional marketers, it is vanishing
entirely. This much is clear: if surgeons entrust the business side of their
practice to salespeople, the salespeople will sell it, and cosmetic surgery
sells extremely well. Anne Tynion, of Unicorn Financial Services, says medicine
is "moving away from a cottage industry into a customer-service industry" and
that doctors have no choice but to acknowledge that.
"Elective procedures have become a consumer product, and consumerism
necessitates an ability to finance," says Tynion, who was formerly
vice-president for global marketing at Harley-Davidson. "Think back -- today,
most doctors [accept] a high-interest-rate credit card. Five years ago, nobody
did. What you're seeing is the more progressive doctors -- the visionary
doctors -- who really see [surgery] as a consumer product."
With this statement, the power of the doctor drains away, and the patient --
or, more accurately, the consumer -- is in charge, with whatever ideas she may
have about how her body should look. It's hard to imagine the tide will turn
back of its own accord, now that this philosophical shift has begun.
People in America still hate their bodies. More people still want cosmetic
surgery than have it, and the business will continue to grow, and doctors will
have a harder time saying no. This doesn't answer the question of what will
happen as the lending infrastructure develops -- whether default levels will
bankrupt lending companies, and whether dissatisfied customers will react by
suing their doctors, or attacking them, and whether, in 20 years, a large
number of Americans will be liquidating their assets to pay off breast
implants. But if you ever wondered what it would be like to live in a society
where cosmetic surgery was seen as an inalienable right, put your mind at rest.
You already do.
Ellen Barry can be reached at ebarry[a]phx.com.