Everything New Under The Sun Thanks to:
briangreen.org
justin.cerastes.org
pilgrimsprogress.net
chizadek.wordpress.com
About this Entry
Posted by: Elnwood

Visit Elnwood's Xanga Site

Original: 8/9/2007 11:47 AM
Comments: 1
eProps: 2

Read Comments
Post a Comment
Back to Your Xanga Site


Who gave the eProps?
2 eProps!2 eProps! 2 eProps from:
WasaiWarrior

Thursday, August 09, 2007
 

Doctors should not evangelize?

So writes Richard P. Sloan, Professor of Behavioral Medical at Columbia University Medical Center.

"Because medical patients very often are in pain and fearful, they are especially vulnerable to manipulation by physicians who, even in these days of medical consumerism, retain positions of authority in the physician-patient relationship. When doctors capitalize on this authority to pursue a religious rather than a medical agenda, they violate ethical standards of patient care," he writes.

Sloan also opposes exemption for doctors who believe that certain treatments are unethical, stating that "because doctors have state licenses giving them exclusive rights to practice medicine, they have an obligation to deliver medical care to all those who seek it, not just to those who share their religious convictions."

What Sloan is doing is presenting a false dichotomy.  He writes, "being a medical professional means assuming certain responsibilities and foremost among them is acting in the interests of your patients rather than allowing your personal religious beliefs to interfere."  He is pitting religious beliefs against the interest of the patients, but there is no clear distinction.

For a Christian doctor, religious belief plays a major part in determining what is in the best interest of the patient.  For example, many doctors, Christian or non-Christian won't perform an abortion, and not only because it would violate their own conscience, but because they believe it is not in the best interest of a patient.

A Christian doctor knows that what makes a person well is, in addition to proper medical care, is believing the gospel.  Sloan presents these ends as opposed to each other, but proper medical care and soul care do not oppose each other.  It is not as if a Christian doctor is neglecting medical care at the expense of sharing the gospel.

Sloan wants to present "the best interest of the patient" as something that is purely objective, but it is not so simple.  What Sloan wants is to impose his own view of the best interest of the patient over and against the views of a given Christian doctor.  To those who oppose Sloan's view, he makes the following suggestion: "find another profession."

Currently Reading
Foundations of God's City: Christians in a Crumbling Culture
By James Montgomery Boice
see related
 Posted 8/9/2007 11:47 AM - 1 comments

Give eProps or Post a Comment

1 Comment

Visit WasaiWarrior's Xanga Site!
There's a difference between sharing the Gospel and proselytizing, especially as a health professional. Doctors are under no obligation to hide their personal opinions regarding treatment so long as they are disclosed as personal. For example, if I as a physician don't believe that certain Chinese herbal medicines are beneficial to my patient, I am entitled to express that opinion so long as I mention all alternative forms of treatment and expressly indicate that this perspective is my own. The same holds for any other opinion or belief, including religious.

That said, a doctor cannot be too careful in the exercise of his or her faith, especially in the sensitive context of a "power relationship" like the doctor/patient one. By asking, "Can I pray for you?" or "Would you like to hear what I believe?", the doctor is extending an invitation from the personal level rather than the power level. In fact, studies and surveys are beginning to indicate that many (if not most) patients are not only comfortable with talking about spirituality with their doctor but actually prefer it. In a healthcare system that already feels impersonal and objective, the touch of religion and spiritual warmth, especially in the context of acute suffering and need, is often appreciated. Explicit evangelism, though, may not be so welcome... in the case of imminent death, usually patients opt for a chaplaincy rather than their doctor's perspective anyways. Generally speaking, the doctor is usually far too busy anyways to have the leisure of a heart-to-heart conversation about faith... except in the context of private practice, in which case the doctor has more freedom anyways.
Posted 8/9/2007 1:43 PM by WasaiWarrior Xanga True Member - reply


Choose Identity
(?)
 
Give eProps (?)
Post a Comment
Add Link | Preview HTML comment help 
Profile Pic:
Default  |  Choose »  (?)



Back to Elnwood's Xanga Site!
Note: your comment will appear in Elnwood's local time zone:
GMT -08:00 (Pacific Standard - US, Canada)
Notable Posts: