Well, I suspect that regularly seeing a family doctor (if one can afford to do so) is a very good thing to do, regardless of whether one is a man, woman, or child. I can say, however, that I went years without seeing a doctor and didn't particularly suffer for it. I couldn't afford going to a doctor as a student, low-wage worker, or graduate student, so I didn't go. Going would not have improved my health on the chronic conditions this is concerned with: I have low blood pressure; decent cholesterol and other blood panel numbers; and have Type 1 (so all the advice in the world wouldn't have made any difference).
The following line has me a bit concerned:
and your family physician can provide the treatment you need.
I suspect this is generally not true for most men in the United States who are at risk for or are diagnosed as diabetic. Misdiagnoses, bad dietary advice, contradictory information about the best way to treat diabetes (walk more, "eat more carbs," "don't test too often," "just take Metformin," and other such gems are often all the advice an assumed Type 2 man is likely to get from a family doctor). Through no fault of their own, most family doctors are not qualified to diagnose or treat diabetes properly. With children, they tend to err on the side of sanity: "go to the ER" if the child's BG is high; or "go to a pediatric endocrinologist" if BG is within "normal ranges" but other symptoms are there. Adults rarely get this, especially if (god forbid) they happen to be even slightly overweight by BMI.
I also very strongly suspect that the "increased rates of chronic conditions" are primarily due to better monitoring and changing definitions, although I know many people will disagree with me on that front. A major issue in accuracy with measuring things like "blood pressure" and "diabetes" in the population at large results from differences in the way clinical evaluations (of an individual) and statistical, epidemiological evaluations (of a population) are performed. Populations are always, only, and by necessity measured using statistical indicators, and we often confuse the results of such tests with evaluations (and tests) necessary to diagnose an individual patient.
For example, consider myself and the infamous "Body Mass Index." Thanks to having shrunk by an inch in the last two years, I am now officially "overweight" with a BMI of 25.1. My weight hasn't actually changed much, although it has fluctuated by +/- 5 pounds over the last five years. My body fat % is 13.5, I meet the Class 1 fitness standard for the US Marine Corps at the age of 42, and am a competitive amateur athlete. I used to be a collegiate and semi-pro athlete, and was always well over the "overweight" limit of BMI thanks to muscle mass. I am, in other words, nowhere close to overweight or obese in any health sense whatsoever, but I am certainly overweight by statistical classification of populations. This confused my family doctor to the point where he refused to test to determine whether I was really Type 1 or 2, because he "knew" I was Type 2 because, as he told me, "you are overweight and have put on about five pounds since I started seeing you."
Now I have a different family doctor, who is smart enough to know the difference between individual assessment and measures of populations. She doesn't presume to manage my diabetes, and has referred me to specialists instead. As she should have.
Also, the cholesterol measurements are weird. High cholesterol runs in my dad's family, and I've always been in the "your numbers are fine but keep an eye on them." All the sudden, I'm diagnosed with diabetes, and it's a "we need to start you on a statin and get those numbers down!" Numbers hadn't changed (although my triglycerides were pretty high, which makes sense given the impaired glucose metabolism) much, but all the sudden my (idiot) doctor wanted me to have perfect cholesterol. Got all the standard advice: start a statin; eat less fat and more "healthy" carbs; avoid all saturated fats like the plague. Anyhow...I rejected the advice (and doctor) and have been following a high-fat, low(ish) carb diet with a ton of fish oil as a supplement, and...my cholesterol numbers are now perfect, and it mostly resulted from more fat and fewer carbs (which is also great for managing BG).
Family doctors just aren't well enough or comprehensively trained to deal with metabolic issues in my opinion. And metabolic issues, as we all know here on this board, vary wildly from individual to individual by a whole host of factors we don't know or understand from a scientific standpoint...