Despite extensive theoretical debate, concrete efforts to overcome paternalism and unbalanced power relations between patients and doctors have produced limited results. In this article, I examine...

The notion of consent which rose to the forefront in biomedical ethics as an attempt to safeguard patients' autonomy, is relatively new. The notion itself requires qualification, for it precludes neither duress nor ignorance. More seriously, I argue here that consent is redundant except in situations where paternalism prevails. Paradoxically, these are the very situations where it may be difficult to uphold or to verify voluntary consent. I suggest that a request-based relationship has the potential to overcome these difficulties. (...) It enhances patients' participation in decision making, requires that the patients remain in command and avoids their subordination. Request is also more conducive to treatments that are representative of patients' own values and perceptions. In practice, what one wants and what one agrees to, often concur. But these are not conceptually identical issues, and they carry important differences of emphasis. (shrink)

The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 5, Page 15-16, May 2012.

Background: Doctor–patient sexual relationship is considered to be unfair because the first party would be abusing the second party’s vulnerability. The prohibition of this relationship is noted in the Hippocratic oath. Currently, a reprise of the use of oaths in medical schools can be observed.Aim: To determine whether the prohibition has been maintained and how its expression has varied in the oaths during different periods.Methods: 50 oaths were studied: 13 ancient–medieval and 37 modern–contemporary. Of the 50 (...) texts, 19 were versions of the original oaths. The oaths that pointed out the prohibited doctor–patient relationship referred to any sexual aspect or included paragraphs that began as the Hippocratic oath does were noted.Results: Of the 24 texts that expressed the prohibition, 8 were ancient–medieval and 16 were modern–contemporary. Some expressly call it Hippocratic oath, many use general terminology and others describe it in association with other commitments .Conclusions: The clause on the prohibition of the doctor–patient sexual relationship in Hippocratic oath was included to be for legal, economic and social reasons at the time. That the clause is found mostly in the ancient–medieval oaths can be attributed to the influence of the original. This commitment is generalised and associated with others by contemporary formulas. Currently, sexual relationships are the subject of legal and ethical analysis and their inclusion in the oaths is being debated. (shrink)

The World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki offers guidelines to doctors engaged in biomedical research with human subjects. The fundamental distinction of the Declaration is between clinical research combined with professional care and non-clinical scientific research. If hospital patients are the experimental subjects, then the former research must be carried out by the patient's own doctor, whereas the latter research must not be; it must be carried out by other doctors. The relevance of the distinction between the (...) class='Hi'>patient's own doctor and other doctors is challenged and an alternative conception of the patient-doctor relationship is drawn, together with an alternative justification, based on the work of Hans Jonas, of the use of patients in research. Finally, the political nature of the patient-doctor relationship is mentioned, and it is claimed that the alternative conception of this relationship developed in the paper is more in line with the ethical principles of the Hippocratic tradition. (shrink)

Bioethics is a subject far removed from the Chinese, even from many Chinese medical students and medical professionals. In-depth interviews with eighteen physicians, patients, and family members provided a deeper understanding of bioethical practices in contemporary China, especially with regard to the doctor-patient relationship (DPR) and informed consent. The Chinese model of doctor-family-patient relationship (DFPR), instead of DPR, is taken to reflect Chinese Confucian cultural commitments. An examination of the history of Chinese culture and (...) the profession of medicine in China is used to disclose the deep roots of these commitments. The author predicts that the DFPR model will further develop in China but that it will maintain its Chinese character. (shrink)

The growth of managed care was accompanied by concern about the impact that changes in health care organization would have on the doctor-patient relationship. We now are in a “post-managed care era,” where some of these changes in health care delivery have come to pass while others have not. A re-examination of the DPR in this setting suggests some surprising results. Rather than posing a new and unprecedented threat, managed care was simply the most recent of numerous (...) strains on the DPR that have occurred throughout the century. These strains are a constant, inevitable consequence of the varying needs and concerns of patient and physicians as they seek to balance their desires for a certain type of DPR with their simultaneous desire for other aspects of care such as lower costs, greater technological sophistication, and improved outcomes. (shrink)

The nature of the doctor–patient relationship is central to the practice of medicine and thus to bioethics. The American Medical Association (in AMA principles of medical ethics, available at: https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/patient-physician-relationships, 2016) states, “The practice of medicine, and its embodiment in the clinical encounter between a patient and a physician, is fundamentally a moral activity that arises from the imperative to care for patients and to alleviate suffering.” In this issue of Christian Bioethics, leading scholars consider (...) what relevance (if any) Christianity brings to the relationship between physician and patient: does Christianity make a difference? The contributors consider this question from several different perspectives: the proper model of medicine, the role that the Christian moral tradition can play in medicine in a secular pluralistic society, how a Christian understanding of virtue can inform practices such as perinatal hospice and physician-assisted suicide, and whether or not appeals to Christian values can (or should) ground a physician’s right to conscientious objection. (shrink)

This article reports the results of a survey, by mailed questionnaire, of the attitudes, values and practices of doctors in Singapore with respect to the doctor-patient relationship. Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of 475 doctors (261 general practitioners and 214 medical specialists), out of which 249 (52.4%) valid responses were completed and returned. The survey is the first of its kind in Singapore. Questions were framed around issues of medical paternalism, consent and patient autonomy. (...) As the doctors were exposed to Western ethical concepts in their training, we were not surprised to find that they would mostly allow patients some say in decision-making and keep patients reasonably informed. In respecting patient autonomy, they would usually seek to influence patient choice by persuasion. However, the residual "Asian-ness" of doctors in Singapore gives rise to some inconsistencies between values and practices. Many doctors still believe that a number of their patients are incapable of rational choice. There is some lack of openness in telling patients the whole truth. When patients choose to refuse treatment, many doctors are prepared to involve family members in making a consensus decision. Doctors were also asked how they made ethical judgements in the face of dilemmas, and how they would like disputes with patients to be resolved. By and large, the doctors prefer to make their own judgements rather than to rely on rules. They also wish to keep the law courts out of disputes with patients, preferring less public ways of settling disputes. (shrink)

The conception of the doctor–patient relationship under Australian law has followed British common law tradition whereby the relationship is founded in a contractual exchange. By contrast, this article presents a rationale and framework for an alternative model—a “Trust Model”—for implementation into law to more accurately reflect the contemporary therapeutic dynamic. The framework has four elements: an assumption that professional conflicts with patient safety, motivated by financial or personal interests, should be avoided; an onus on doctors (...) to disclose these conflicts; a proposed mechanism to contend with instances where doctors choose not to disclose; and sanctions for non-compliance with the regime. (shrink)

Doctor/patient sexual contact has become a focal ethical issue of the 1990s. Guidelines or codes of ethics have been issued by various Medical Boards, prohibiting or regulating such conduct In some jurisdictions in Australia and elsewhere, such conduct has been deemed an offence under certain conditions. Mandatory reporting provisions may also apply. A clear profile of offending doctors and their areas of specialisation is emerging from various studies. The patient profile is less clear. The potential for harm (...) to both the patient and the offending doctor is an issue of concern, as is the apparently ineffective role of education in changing some doctor’s behaviour. The issue of sexual contact with former patients remains a grey area. (shrink)

It is perhaps most useful to approach the Doctor-Patient relationship (DPR) by admitting that it’s complicated. We review some of the strategies that have been employed to mitigate this complexity, zeroing in on one that promises to capture the main features of the DPR without eliminating some of its more important, existential components; pieces of the puzzle that must be retained if we are to avoid oversimplification and the errors that can arise by ignoring important foundational properties. (...) We believe that a useful way to look at the DPR and to capture essential features that must be balanced in the process is provided by Partnership Theory and its definition in terms of the so-called domination and partnership systems. We apply this theory to the DPR and investigate the implications of this application to health care. We see that in the absence of mitigating circumstances, adoption of the patient-as-partner model serves healthcare well and is flexible enough to accommodate circumstances that dictate modifications. (shrink)

Artificial intelligence (AI) based clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are becoming ever more widespread in healthcare and could play an important role in diagnostic and treatment processes. For this reason, AI‐based CDSS has an impact on the doctor–patient relationship, shaping their decisions with its suggestions. We may be on the verge of a paradigm shift, where the doctor–patient relationship is no longer a dual relationship, but a triad. This paper analyses the role of (...) AI‐based CDSS for shared decision‐making to better comprehend its promises and associated ethical issues. Moreover, it investigates how certain AI implementations may instead foster the inappropriate paradigm of paternalism. Understanding how AI relates to doctors and influences doctor–patient communication is essential to promote more ethical medical practice. Both doctors' and patients' autonomy need to be considered in the light of AI. (shrink)

The nature of the doctor-patient relationship as a keystone of care necessitates philosophical, psychological and sociological considerations. The present study investigates concepts related to these three critical views considered especially important. From the philosophical viewpoint, the three concepts of "the demands of ethics “,” ethical phenomenology and "the philosophy of the relationship" are of particular importance. From a psychological point of view, the five concepts of "communication behavior patterns", "psychic distance", "emotional quotient", "conflict between pain relief (...) and truth-telling", and "body language" have received specific emphasis. Lastly, from the sociological perspective, the three notions of "instrumental action", "communicative action", and "reaching agreement in the light of communicative action" are the most significant concepts to reconsider in the doctor-patient relationship. It should be added, however, that from the sociological point of view, the doctor-patient relationship goes beyond a two-person interaction, as the moral principles of doctors and patients depend on medical and patient ethics respectively. The theoretical foundations of the doctor-patient relationship will finally help establish the different dimensions of medical interactions. This can contribute to the development of principles and multidisciplinary bases for establishing practical ethical codes and will eventually result in a more effective doctor-patient relationship. (shrink)

Philosophical concerns cannot be excluded from even a cursory examination of the physician-patient relationship. Two possible alternatives for determining what this relationship entails are the teleological (outcome) approach vs the deontological (process) one. Traditionally, this relationship has been structured around the 'clinical model' which views the physician-patient relationship in teleological terms. Data on the actual content of general medical practice indicate the advisability of reassessing this relationship, and suggest that the 'clinical model' may (...) be too limiting, and that a more appropriate basis for the physician-patient relationship is one described in this paper as the 'relational model'. (shrink)

In this eye-opening look at the doctor-patient decision-making process, physician and law professor Jay Katz examines the time-honored belief in the virtue of silent care and patient compliance. Historically, the doctor-patient relationship has been based on a one-way trust -- despite recent judicial attempts to give patients a greater voice through the doctrine of informed consent. Katz criticizes doctors for encouraging patients to relinquish their autonomy, and demonstrates the detrimental effect their silence has on (...) good patient care. Seeing a growing need in this age of medical science and sophisticated technology for more honest and complete communication between physician and patients, he advocates a new, informed dialogue that respects the rights and needs of both sides. In a new foreword to this edition of The Silent World of Doctor and Patient , Alexander Morgan Capron outlines the changes in medical ethics practice that have occurred since the book was first published in 1984, paying particular attention to the hotly debated issues of physician-assisted suicide and informed consent in managed care. (shrink)

Using a real-life case involving an accidental discovery of misattributed paternity as a springboard for discussion, I reflect on several practical and theoretical issues surrounding truth-telling in the doctor-patient relationship. I present the moral dilemma and identify arguments in favour of and against disclosure. I then examine the theoretical difficulties in balancing conflicting reasons and in establishing what constitutes the 'truth'. I conclude that withholding the information from the patients would be ethically permissible and, more generally, that (...) honesty is not always the best policy. (shrink)

This essay focuses on the doctor-patient relationship as a measure of ethical behavior by the physician. The perspective is derived from commitment as a religious humanist to the Judaic heritage, and experience in hospitals. The ethical responsibility to be competent professionally is presupposed. Emphasis is placed on the need of the physician to respect the autonomy of the patient as person, thus to limit the paternalism inherent in the physician's position, and to re-enforce this with compassion. (...) Judaic sources supporting such conduct are cited. Exception is taken to decisions by civil and rabbinic judges which disregard the intimacy of the doctor-patient relationship. Keywords: doctor-patient relationship, bioethics, Judaism, compassion, paternalism, autonomy CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this? (shrink)

The commonly occurring metaphors and models of the doctor–patient relationship can be divided into three clusters, depending on what distribution of power they represent: in the paternalist cluster, power resides with the physician; in the consumer model, power resides with the patient; in the partnership model, power is distributed equally between doctor and patient. Often, this tripartite division is accepted as an exhaustive typology of doctor–patient relationships. The main objective of this paper (...) is to challenge this idea by introducing a fourth possibility and distribution of power, namely, the distribution in which power resides with neither doctor nor patient. This equality in powerlessness—the hallmark of “the age of bureaucratic parsimony”—is the point of departure for a qualitatively new doctor–patient relationship, which is best described in terms ofsolidaritybetweencomrades. This paper specifies the characteristics of this specific type of solidarity and illustrates it with a case study of how Swedish doctors and patients interrelate in the sickness certification practice. (shrink)

This article is an examination of the doctor–woman patient encounter through a vulnerability lens. This relationship has been traditionally been critiqued as a paternalistic encounter in which the...

The author offers grounds for preferring a `fiduciary' model of the doctor-patient relationship to either an `authoritative' or a `contractual' model. Within this framework he suggests that certain acts of euthanasia could be accommodated not in any way as duties, but as supererogatory acts of kindness to the patient.

No profession has undergone as much scrutiny in the past several decades as that of medicine. Indeed, one might well argue that no profession has ever undergone so much change in so short a time. An essential part of this change has been the growing insistence that competent, adult patients have the right to decide about the course of their own medical treatment. However, the familiar and widely accepted principle of patient self-determination entails a corollary that has received little (...) attention in the growing literature on the ethics of physician-patient relations: if patients are to direct the course of their own medical treatment, then physicians are at least sometimes to be guided in their actions on behalf of patients by values that are not, and may even be incompatible with, their own values. Unless it is supposed that it would be best if physicians were simply to accommodate any and all patient requests, a possibility I consider and reject in this paper, there are bound to be numerous instances of legitimate moral conflict between the preferences of physicians and patients. In this paper, I examine the implications of this sort of moral conflict from the standpoint of the integrity of the physician. -/- Critical to a proper appreciation of the significance of this conflict is a distinction that the literature on biomedical ethics has largely failed to draw: that between medical paternalism and physician integrity. (shrink)

Metaphors of medicine are common, such as war, which is evident in much of our language about health‐care where patients and healthcare professionals fight disease, or the game, which is one way to frame the nurse–doctor professional relationship. This study analyses six pilot episodes of American (Grey's Anatomy, Hawthorne, Mercy, Nurse Jackie) and Australian (All Saints, RAN) medical television programmes premiering between 1998 and 2009 to assess one way that our contemporary culture understands and constructs professional relationships between (...) nurses and doctors. Analysis shows that these popular television programmes frequently depict conflict, with games, civil war and mutiny between nurses and doctors over patient safety rather than professionals working collaboratively in teams to deliver health‐care. Although the benefit of this televised conflict is the implication that nurses are knowledgeable, skilled professionals, the negative connotations include a dysfunctional and dangerous healthcare system, and also ongoing power struggles. Given that popular culture can sometimes influence the public's understanding of real‐life nursing practice, it is important to explore what these metaphors of conflict are communicating about the nurse–doctor relationship. (shrink)

The medical profession is steeped in traditions that guide its practice. These traditions were developed to preserve the well-being of patients. Transformations in science, technology, and society, while maintaining a self-governance structure that drives the goal of care provision, have remained hallmarks of the profession. The purpose of this paper is to examine ethical challenges in health care as it relates to Big Data, Accountable Care Organizations, and Health Care Predictive Analytics using the principles of biomedical ethics laid out by (...) Beauchamp and Childress. Among these are the use of Electronic Health Records within stipulations of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Clinicians are well-positioned to impact health policy development to address ethical issues associated with the use of Big Data, Accountable Care, and Health Care Predictive Analytics as we work to transform the doctor–patient relationship towards improving population health outcomes and creating a healthier society. (shrink)

Over the past decade or so, no issue in medical ethics or bioethics law has raised more concerns about federal intervention in the practice of medicine, about judicial attempts to craft health policy, or about the wisdom of public mandates directing specific health care initiatives than the issue of physician-assisted suicide. State voter referenda, lower and federal court cases, proposed legislation in both houses of Congress, and orders and determinations from agencies within the executive branch of two administrations are representative (...) of the kinds of actions taken in the last ten years implicating medical care at the end of life. Whether the intent was to codify into law physician-assisted suicide, to deny a constitutional right of assisted suicide, or to make “easier” physicians' efforts to alleviate intractable suffering at the risk of hastening death, or to prohibit physician aid in dying altogether, the impact on the patient-doctor relationship and on our understanding of what constitutes dignified and humane care at the end of life is undeniable. (shrink)

Over the past decade or so, no issue in medical ethics or bioethics law has raised more concerns about federal intervention in the practice of medicine, about judicial attempts to craft health policy, or about the wisdom of public mandates directing specific health care initiatives than the issue of physician-assisted suicide. State voter referenda, lower and federal court cases, proposed legislation in both houses of Congress, and orders and determinations from agencies within the executive branch of two administrations are representative (...) of the kinds of actions taken in the last ten years implicating medical care at the end of life. Whether the intent was to codify into law physician-assisted suicide, to deny a constitutional right of assisted suicide, or to make “easier” physicians' efforts to alleviate intractable suffering at the risk of hastening death, or to prohibit physician aid in dying altogether, the impact on the patient-doctor relationship and on our understanding of what constitutes dignified and humane care at the end of life is undeniable. (shrink)

Boundaries in the doctor–patient relationshipis an important concept to help healthprofessionals navigate the complex andsometimes difficult experience between patientand doctor where intimacy and power must bebalanced in the direction of benefitingpatients. This paper reviews the concept ofboundary violations and boundary crossings inthe doctor–patient relationship, cautions aboutcertain kinds of boundary dilemmas involvingdual relationships, gift giving practices,physical contact with patients, andself-disclosure. The paper closes with somerecommendations for preventing boundaryviolations.

Past ages of medical care are condemned in modern philosophical and medical literature as being too paternalistic. The normal account of good medicine in the past was, indeed, paternalistic in an offensive way to modern persons. Imagine a Jean Paul Sartre going to the doctor and being treated without his consent or even his knowledge of what will transpire during treatment! From Hippocratic times until shortly after World War II, medicine operated in a closed, clubby manner. The knowledge learned (...) in medicine was not shared with the patients, who were in general poorly educated and for the most part completely ignorant of the craft of medicine and the physicians. Physicians were cautioned against telling patients too much about their Illness and/or their recovery, perhaps because physicians themselves did not have an enormous armamentarium to confront disease. (shrink)

Despite what I wrote in my medical school applications, my relationship with medicine wasn't always the torrid love affair I made it out to be. Organic chemistry wasn't really my favorite class (or my second favorite, or my third). My heart didn't actually skip a beat as I waited for protein isolates to complete their snail‐paced race across an agarose gel. And while I certainly enjoyed the surgeries I scrubbed into as an undergraduate, even they lost their charm during (...) the fifth hour of standing at attention, hands glued to my chest, petrified I would break the sterile field or pass out from starvation. For me, a career in medicine was a leap of faith. I had to trust that those flashes of meaningful human interaction I experienced early on would increase in frequency and intensity over the course of my career. Fortunately, I have not been disappointed thus far. (shrink)

The centrality of trust in traditional doctor–patient relationships has been criticized as inordinately paternalistic, yet in today's discussions about medical ethics—mostly in response to disruptive innovation in healthcare—trust reappears as an asset to enable empowerment. To turn away from paternalistic trust‐based doctor–patient relationships and to arrive at an empowerment‐based medical model, increasing reference is made to the importance of nurturing trust in technologies that are supposed to bring that empowerment. In this article we stimulate discussion about (...) why the move towards patient empowerment may not be able to keep clear of the criticism of trust in traditional patient–doctor relationships. First, we explore how such a shift in trust dynamics might corrode patient empowerment in the name of patient empowerment. Second, we examine how a translocation of trust may at best push the “trust issue” elsewhere and at worst make it harder to evaluate trustworthiness. (shrink)

ABSTRACT The presence of truth and honesty is a permanent demand, and becomes vital the more committed and intimate a relationship is. Medical practice is relevant to this discussion when one questions whether or not a physician should always tell their patient the truth in the face of a progressive or potentially fatal disease, regarding the diagnosis, outcome, therapy and evolution of the specific disease. From this discussion we aim, with the present report, to look at the truth (...) applicable to the patient‐physician relationship, and its ethical and moral implications; and also to look at where the Brazilian Code of Medical Ethics (BCME) and the medical literature stand regarding this issue. One concludes that there are only two moments not to tell a patient the truth: when the patient does not want to be informed, and when the truth could be iatrogenic. The question now is, when would the truth be iatrogenic? Physicians, in our opinion, would not be able to judge solitarily when the truth might be deleterious to their patient. Alternatively, we propose the appointment of a multidisciplinary commission to help the doctor with such a decision. (shrink)

Power is an inescapable aspect of all socialrelationships, and inherently is neither goodnor evil. Doctors need power to fulfil theirprofessional obligations to multipleconstituencies including patients, thecommunity and themselves. Patients need powerto formulate their values, articulate andachieve health needs, and fulfil theirresponsibilities. However, both parties canuse or misuse power. The ethical effectivenessof a health system is maximised by empoweringdoctors and patients to develop `adult-adult'rather than `adult-child' relationships thatrespect and enable autonomy, accountability,fidelity and humanity. Even in adult-adultrelationships, conflicts and complexitiesarise. Lack of (...) concordance between doctors andpatients can encourage paternalism but may bebest resolved through negotiated care. Afurther area of conflict involves the `doubleagency' of doctors for both patients and thecommunity. Empowerment of all players is notalways possible but is most likely where eachparty considers and acknowledges power issues. (shrink)

The objective of this article is to establish an alternative doctor-patient relationship model and describe its importance in the case of the doctor-patient relationship in Bangladesh. There is a lot of diversity in the religious beliefs, social norms and values in Bangladesh. Likewise, the development of biological science as well as medical technology, the allocation of healthcare resources must be considered as an important issue. That is why the autonomy of both doctor and (...) patient is a relational factor here. Besides, the four traditional doctor-patient relationship models offered by Ezekiel J. Emanuel and Linda L. Emanuel are not beyond criticism. So, we need an ideal doctor-patient relationship model for Bangladesh to protect every patient’s autonomy which will give freedom to the patient in choosing their own treatment as well as which will not conflict with the patient’s social or cultural values. In this article, I have selected the relational model of autonomy as the method of alternative doctor-patient relationship model. Hopefully, this alternative model will work better since it considers care first concerning a patient’s autonomy. Besides, doctors would treat their patients as a ‘care seeker’ rather than ‘client’ or ‘customer’, and simultaneously, patients would perceive their physicians as ‘caregivers’. But, applying the relational model of autonomy in the case of doctor-patient relationship is more challenging in Bangladesh due to some obstacles like large numbers of population, illiteracy, insufficiency of skilled doctors and hospitals, corruption in medical sectors, social prejudices and so on. But, if we can overcome these problems, the relational model of autonomy will be considered as a suitable doctor-patient relationship model in Bangladesh. (shrink)

Vor dem Hintergrund, dass in den Medien und der Öffentlichkeit thematisierte und dargestellte Arztbilder stets auch auf die öffentliche Meinung und die Vorstellungen der Menschen von Ärzten wirken, spürt der Artikel der Frage nach, welches Arztbild die amerikanische TV-KrankenhausserieDr. House transportiert und welche Ausprägung das dargestellte Arzt-Patienten-Verhältnis einnimmt. Hierbei werden die medizinethischen Reflexionen durch eine detaillierte medienwissenschaftliche Genre-Einordnung und dramaturgische Analyse eingerahmt und unterstützt. Zudem werden als Analyseinstrumentarium die vier Modelle des Arzt-Patienten-Verhältnisses nach Emanuel/Emanuel herangezogen. Dieser interdisziplinäre Forschungsansatz zeigt, dass (...) die Hauptfigur der Serie, der Arzt Dr. Gregory House, durchaus als Gegenentwurf einesmodernen Arztes, der fürsorglich, nicht-direktiv und stets im Sinne desinformed consent handelt, konzipiert und präsentiert wird. Doch ist daraus nicht zu schließen, dass die Figur des Dr. House einseitig als Paternalist gezeichnet ist. Die Kategorisierung und Einordnung des Dr. House und der von ihm repräsentierten Arzttugenden ist vielmehr entlangaller Elemente des gesellschaftlichen Arztideals vorzunehmen, zu denen eine entsprechende wissenschaftlich-medizinische Kompetenz, die Orientierung an objektivierbaren Indizien, die Verpflichtung auf das naturwissenschaftliche, evidenzbasierte Ideal, eine angenehme Kommunikation mit dem Patienten sowie die nötige, gebotene Aufklärung zählen. So wird in der Analyse deutlich, dass die Darstellung von Dr. House vielschichtiger ist und immer wieder auf ethische Dilemma-Situationen in der Medizin verweist. Diese wirkmächtige dramatisch-filmische Darstellung von Konfliktsituationen im diagnostisch-therapeutischen Kontext sollte daher auch in der kommunikationswissenschaftlichen Wirkungsforschung vertieft werden. (shrink)

Trust in the doctor-patient relationship is an indispensable structural element for the medical profession. The discourse concerning trust and its importance in the healthcare context, although quite old, elicits increasingly more interest in research, especially for empirical approaches. The importance of trust in the doctor and in the medical profession can be demonstrated by starting from the Christian meaning of illness and medicine ; generally, the patristic sources see medicine and physicians as God’s gifts. T he (...) perception of Christian physicians as dedicated, unselfish and compassionate preservers or restorers of health, always committed to the good of their patients is well known. The model of the Christian physician is a Hippocratic model, of one who seeks the sick so that he may bring relief to them and strengthen them. When illness occurs, Christianity affirms an ethical duty to struggle against sickness, which if unaddressed can lead to death. The moral requirement to care for the health of the body indicates it is appropriate to use healing methods that will enhance health and maintain life. The aim of this paper is to explore the dimensions of the concept of trust in the doctor-patient relationship, by starting from the Christian meaning of illness and of the role of the doctor. The paper presents a number of essential theoretical elements related to trust, as presented in the literature dealing with the doctor-patient relationship: the meaning of trust, its dimensions, its stages of development, its impact, its sources, the patient’s perspectives on trust, the importance of trust for healthcare systems. (shrink)

This book is a collection of papers presented at an interdisciplinary workshop at the Calgary Institute for the Humanities in May 1980. The three broad issues covered are: the physician-patient relationship, the allocation of responsibility among doctors and nurses, and the political and social framework of the health care system. The first set of essays is concerned with the moral and legal aspects of the physician-patient relationship. The link between knowledge and power is examined as well (...) as the moral dilemmas posed by medical technology. These initial essays would alone justify this publ. (shrink)

The doctor-patient relationship is the foundation of any medical intervention. Over time, the relationship has changed, from the era of paternalism to the era of self-determination or patient autonomy, following changes resulting from consumerism and lately, in South Africa, socialised medicine as a result of the proposed National Health Insurance. The premise of this article is that patient autonomy is invariably limited by a determination of who will carry the cost of a medical intervention. (...) In recent years, legislative developments have affected the understanding of a patient and doctor through the introduction of new references, such as ‘user’, ‘data subject’ and ‘consumer’ for a patient, and ‘service provider’ and ‘responsible party’ for a doctor, each giving different meanings to the doctor-patient relationship. Recent statutory additions also include new remedies available to aggrieved patients as parties in the doctor-patient relationship. The article concludes with brief observations on how the NHI will alter the essence and nature of the doctor-patient relationship in future. (shrink)

Past ages of medical care are condemned in modern philosophical and medical literature as being too paternalistic. The normal account of good medicine in the past was, indeed, paternalistic in an offensive way to modern persons. Imagine a Jean Paul Sartre going to the doctor and being treated without his consent or even his knowledge of what will transpire during treatment! From Hippocratic times until shortly after World War II, medicine operated in a closed, clubby manner. The knowledge learned (...) in medicine was not shared with the patients, who were in general poorly educated and for the most part completely ignorant of the craft of medicine and the physicians (but not, perhaps, of folk medicine). Physicians were cautioned against telling patients too much about their Illness and/or their recovery, perhaps because physicians themselves did not have an enormous armamentarium to confront disease. (shrink)

For over a decade, managed care has profoundly altered how healthcare is delivered in the United States. There have been concerns that the patient-physician relationship may be undermined by various aspects of managed care, such as restrictions on physician choice, productivity requirements that limit the time physicians may spend with patients, and the use of compensation formulas that reward physicians for healthcare dollars not spent. We have previously published data on the effects of managed care on the physician- (...) class='Hi'>patient relationship from the physician's perspective. In 1999, we collected data on the impact of managed care arrangements on the physician-patient relationship from the patient's perspective. This article discusses our collective findings. (shrink)

Background Paternalism/overprotection limits communication between healthcare professionals and patients and does not promote shared therapeutic decision-making. In the global north, communication patterns have been regulated to promote autonomy, whereas in the global south, they reflect the physician’s personal choices. The goal of this study was to contribute to knowledge on the communication patterns used in clinical practice in Mexico and to identify the determinants that favour a doctor–patient relationship characterized by low paternalism/autonomy. Methods A self-report study on (...) communication patterns in a sample of 761 mental healthcare professionals in Central and Western Mexico was conducted. Multiple ordinal logistic regression models were used to analyse paternalism and associated factors. Results A high prevalence of paternalism was observed among mental health professionals in Mexico. The main determinants of low paternalism/autonomy were medical specialty and gender, with female physicians being more likely to explicitly share diagnoses and therapeutic strategies with patients and their families. A pattern of highly explicit communication was strongly associated with low paternalism/autonomy. Finally, a modifying effect of age strata on the association between communication pattern or specialty and low paternalism/autonomy was observed. Conclusions Among mental health professionals in Mexico, high paternalism prevailed. Gender, specialty, and a pattern of open communication were closely associated with low paternalism/autonomy. Strengthening health professionals’ competencies and promoting explicit communication could contribute to the transition towards more autonomist communication in clinical practice in Mexico. The ethical implications will need to be resolved in the near future. (shrink)