what if...

What would happen if diagnosis was entirely separated from prescription?  So you'd go to a doctor to diagnose a problem and get a document stating your condition and/or recorded symptom.  (Like an optometrist today records measurements of your eye performance on visual tests.)  Then you'd take your diagnosis somewhere else to get treatment.  Perhaps treatment could be an expansion of the pharmacist role, or it could be a whole new role in medicine.

• Is there a way to legalize self-prescribing of some medications?  Which medications?
• Is there a way to reduce legal burdens by spreading medical expertise amongst other working classes besides "doctors"?  Like perhaps the midwife can still do today?
• Is there a way to remove the profit motive from medical care?  The obvious conflict of interest is that doctors/corporations get more money if they keep you only healthy enough to come back for more consultations.
• Is there a way to reward doctors for fast and accurate diagnoses, regardless of patient outcome?
• Given a diagnosis, is there a way to increase competition for treatment options and reduce costs?

Perhaps treatment regimen provides the immediate feedback that a doctor needs to reinforce learning that a diagnosis was accurate.  If the two activities were split, maybe doctors would be less accurate instead of more accurate with diagnoses?

I'm just wondering out loud.