Skip to main content
Log in

Autonomy in the medical profession in the United Kingdom – an historical perspective

  • Published:
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper reviews the concept of professional autonomy from anhistorical perspective. It became formalised in the United Kingdom onlyafter a long struggle throughout most of the nineteenth century. In itspure form professional autonomy implies unlimited powers to undertakemedical investigations and to prescribe treatment, irrespective of cost.Doctors alone should determine the quality of care and the levels ofremuneration to which they should be entitled. In the second half of thetwentieth century a steady erosion of professional autonomy occurred inthe United Kingdom. The level of remuneration has been restricted formost doctors for nearly fifty years, whilst the costs of health carehave steadily reduced the doctor's ability to provide unrestricted carewithin the health care system. Reorganisation of the National HealthService in 1983 and 1991 has substantially eroded professional autonomy,to the point where research developments, clinical judgement and ethicalstandards are all now being placed at risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Bartrip P. Themselves Writ Large. London: BMJ publications, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brockliss LWB. Medical Reform, the Enlightenment and Physician-Power in Late Eighteenth-Century France. In: Porter R, ed., Medicine in the Enlightenment. Amsterdam: Atlanta GA, Rodopi, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  3. British Medical Journal Supplement. International Medical Policy and the Questions of Unqualified Practice 1930; 2: 30–32.

  4. Budrys G. When Doctors Join Unions. Ithaca: NY Cornell University Press, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Campbell AV. Establishing Ethical Priorities in Medicine. British Medical Journal 1977; 1: 818–821.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Department of Health. The New NHS, Cm3807. London: HMSO, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Department of Health. Supporting Doctors, Protecting Patients. London: HMSO, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Garcia-Ballester L. Medical Ethics in the Latin Medicine of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries. In: Wear A, Geyer-Kordesch J, French R, eds., Doctors and Ethics. Amsterdam: Atlanta GA, Rodopi, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Grell OP. Conflicting Duties: Plague and the Obligations of EarlyModern Physicians Towards Patients and Commonwealth in England and the Netherlands. In: Wear A, Geyer-Kordesch J, French R, eds., Doctors and Ethics. Amsterdam: Atlanta GA, Rodopi, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hart N. The Sociology of Health and Medicine. Causeway Books, 1985.

  11. Horner J Stuart. The Management Myth. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London 1997; 31: 149–152.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Horner J Stuart. Conclusion: Change Health Care-A British Point of View. In Kilner, Orr, Shelley, eds., The Changing Face of Health Care. Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hutton W. The State We're In. London: Jonathan Cape, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kilner John F, Orr Robert D, Shelley Judith A. The Changing Face of Health Care. Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lee-Potter J. A Damn Bad Business: The NHS Deformed. London Victor Gollancz., 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  16. McGrath AM. Survey of Neuroleptic Prescribing in Residents of Nursing Homes in Glasgow. British Medical Journal 1996; 312: 611–612.

    Google Scholar 

  17. McKeown T. The Role of Medicine. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Percival T. Medical Ethics. London: J Johnson, 1803.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pickstone JV. Medicine and Industrial Society. Manchester University Press, 1985.

  20. Pollock Allyson M, Dunnigan Matthew G, Gaffney Declan, Price David, Shaoul Jean. The Private Finance Initiative. Planning the “New” NHS: Downsizing for the 21st Century. British Medical Journal 1999; 319: 179–184.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Porter R. Disease, Medicine and Society in England 1550–1860. London: Macmillan, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Porter R. Health for Sale. Manchester University Press, 1989.

  23. Report of the Inquiry into the Regulation of the Medical Profession. London: H.M.S.O., 1975; Cmnd. 6018.

  24. Smith R. The End of the GMC. British Medical Journal 1993; 307: 954.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Smith RG. Medical Discipline. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sprung CL. Changing Attitudes and Practices in Foregoing Life-Sustaining Treatments. Journal of the American Medical Association 1990; 263: 2211–2215.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Starr P. The Coming of the Corporation. In: The Transformation of American Medicine. New York NY: Basic Books, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stacey M. Regulating British Medicine. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Timmins N. The Five Giants. London: Harper Collins, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Thornton JG, Lilford RG. Clinical Ethics Committee. British Medical Journal 1995; 311: 667–669.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Waddington I. The Medical Profession in the Industrial Revolution. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wilson A. The Making of Man Midwifery. London: UCL Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Horner, J.S. Autonomy in the medical profession in the United Kingdom – an historical perspective. Theor Med Bioeth 21, 409–423 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009969205289

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009969205289

Navigation