Holistic model as a challenge for the medical profession

Q4 Arts and Humanities Argument Biannual Philosophical Journal Pub Date : 2020-12-19 DOI:10.24917/20841043.10.1.10
Nina Putała
{"title":"Holistic model as a challenge for the medical profession","authors":"Nina Putała","doi":"10.24917/20841043.10.1.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents a doctor–patient relationship model based on the assumptions of a holistic approach to the patient. The author draws attention to selected patients’ needs, ones taken into account in this model. These are the right to autonomy and an individualised approach to the patient. These issues, considered in relation to philosophy, show a conflict between patients’ values and aspirations and doctors’ values and their experience. Nowadays, patients’ needs are protected by consumer rights as well as being strengthened by postmodern philosophy, which shapes society’s awareness of various definitions of health and underlines the right of the indi‐ vidual to self ‐determination. This situation creates an incredible challenge for doctors because attempts to assist is, according to medical knowledge, associated with an inevitable collision with the subjective perception of a patient’s health. Because of this issue, the author consid‐ ers it necessary to enquire about the needs and aspirations of not so much patients as doctors themselves. It is assumed that the definition of what is currently important for this group determines the scope of any possible admission or intentional ignorance of patients’ needs.","PeriodicalId":30403,"journal":{"name":"Argument Biannual Philosophical Journal","volume":"10 1","pages":"173-194"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Argument Biannual Philosophical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24917/20841043.10.1.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article presents a doctor–patient relationship model based on the assumptions of a holistic approach to the patient. The author draws attention to selected patients’ needs, ones taken into account in this model. These are the right to autonomy and an individualised approach to the patient. These issues, considered in relation to philosophy, show a conflict between patients’ values and aspirations and doctors’ values and their experience. Nowadays, patients’ needs are protected by consumer rights as well as being strengthened by postmodern philosophy, which shapes society’s awareness of various definitions of health and underlines the right of the indi‐ vidual to self ‐determination. This situation creates an incredible challenge for doctors because attempts to assist is, according to medical knowledge, associated with an inevitable collision with the subjective perception of a patient’s health. Because of this issue, the author consid‐ ers it necessary to enquire about the needs and aspirations of not so much patients as doctors themselves. It is assumed that the definition of what is currently important for this group determines the scope of any possible admission or intentional ignorance of patients’ needs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
整体模式对医学专业的挑战
本文提出了一个基于对患者采取整体方法的假设的医患关系模型。作者提请注意选定患者的需求,这些需求在该模型中得到了考虑。这些是自主权和对患者的个性化处理。这些与哲学相关的问题表明,患者的价值观和愿望与医生的价值观及其经验之间存在冲突。如今,患者的需求受到消费者权利的保护,也受到后现代哲学的加强,后现代哲学塑造了社会对各种健康定义的认识,并强调了个人的自决权。这种情况给医生带来了难以置信的挑战,因为根据医学知识,试图提供帮助与对患者健康的主观感知不可避免地发生冲突。由于这个问题,作者认为有必要询问的不是病人的需求和愿望,而是医生自己。据推测,目前对这一群体重要的定义决定了任何可能入院或故意忽视患者需求的范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Argument  Biannual Philosophical Journal
Argument Biannual Philosophical Journal Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Anil Seth, Being you. A new science of consciousness A revitalisation of virtue ethics in contemporary education Synkretyczne pouczenie jogiczne w Ćarakasanhicie (Śarirasthana 1.137–155) Geistlosigkeit. Reflexionen zur Aktualität von Søren Kierkegaards Konstruktion des Selbst im Spannungsfeld von Immanenz und Transzendenz Dharmarāja and Dhammarāja (II)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1