What do you expect when you constantly tell people they shouldn't have to pay for medical care? Most people don't have a very high regard for "free stuff" or even "cheap stuff".
The US Medical system puts patients and doctors in an adversarial relationship from the start.
The doctor in the US operates as a gatekeeper for medical services. Another word for gatekeeper is guard, and they arm guards for a reason.
I was chatting with a doctor who was talking about how owning a gun increases the risk of suicide, so he was thinking about asking patients about whether they owned one, but was concerned that patients might resent being asked. So, we had a bit of a chat about why patients lie to their doctors.
I know somebody who needs a lot of chronic medical care. They've come to greatly resent doctors in general, though not 100% of the time. The doctor basically wants to be in the role of the final-decision-maker. The US legal system ensures that if the doctor doesn't take this role he gets thoroughly screwed because if he prescribes a treatment course which isn't by-the-book he gets sued. On the other hand, the patient might not agree with the course of treatment and might want a different one. However, in the US medications and often even tests are illegal to sell without a prescription, so the patient's options end up being to either do what the doctor wants, convince them to do something else, find another doctor they can convince, or forgo treatment altogether. The patient is automatically going to resent the doctor for having this choice foisted upon them, even though the doctor didn't personally create the US medical system (though the AMA certainly helps to perpetuate it). Due to the whole liability thing, often the best way to "convince" a doctor to go with a different treatment is to manipulate them by controlling their access to information or lying to them.
The thing is, it is also in the patient's best interests to get frank advice from their doctor. The problem is that in the US we don't offer the patient of receiving frank advice and making an unrestricted treatment decision.
Then money becomes a factor as well, since insurance companies want to pay for the treatment option that is statistically the most likely to cost them the least - ie the patient gets better as fast as possible at the lowest cost. So, they get a say in treatment as well. I think that the folks paying for treatment ought to have a say in the matter, but there has to be a way to do this without taking ALL control away from the patient. If nothing else they should be able to pay for their own pills maybe with a credit for whatever the standard of care would typically cost.
IMO doctors shouldn't be gatekeepers except in limited circumstances. I'm fine with them being gatekeeper for antibiotics (even though it seems like many fail at that job today), since abuse of antibiotics is a public health problem. I'm fine with them having responsibility for reporting epidemics and such - anything that is a true public health problem and not merely a personal one. Otherwise, if somebody wants a test then as long as they understand the risks they ought to be able to pay for a test just like they can pay to get a tattoo. All medications should be available over-the-counter. By all means still have a system of prescriptions so that insurers can decide when to pay for medications, but if somebody wants to take something that is contra-indicated, that should be their right.
Maybe there is an in-between solution. However, if you want people to stop resenting doctors then you need to make them feel like they're the ones actually in control of their treatment.