Category: Medical professionalism

The Lancet has a great editorial today. It’s about the need for guidance for doctors who are asked to assess prisoners who are hunger strikers. They say that doctors should recognise that hunger strike may be the sole method of protest a prisoner has. People who are starving, however, may become confused and disorientated; the difficulty then is to decide whether the person is competent, with medical capacity to decline intervention. Intervention has and is used in this situation, for example in Guantanamo Bay, where prisoners have been, and are, force fed. However, says the Lancet, force feeding has no place in high quality medical care. Independent physicans are required to explain the risks to life that the striker is taking. However, advance directives written by a competent person should mean that if confusion afflicts a prisoner due to a chosen hunger strike, their preordained wishes should be followed.  

Force feeding is not nice. Dr David Nicoll, a neurologist in England, has done a huge amount to highlight this issue (correspondence between him and a previous commander of the Guantanamo military hospital is available here.) The picture of the ‘restraint chair’ that is used is especially harrowing. The bottom line is that individuals with mental capacity have the right to choose what medical care they want – and don’t want. Doctors have to respect that right.

This week’s BMJ carries a review I’ve written on Iona Heath’s new book ‘Matters of Life and Death: Key Writings’. Dr Heath is a GP in London and is someone whose attitude towards medicine I’ve admired for many years. This book has made me think hard about what it is that doctors are meant to do, and what makes a good life and a good death. It is a shame it’s been packaged as a medical textbook as it deserves a far wider audience. Apparently in Italy it’s been released as a general interest book which makes more sense to me.

As I was logging on to the BMJ website to get the link to the review I noticed the banner advertisement. It was not advertising pharmaceuticals or medical conferences  – the usual products seen here – but the somewhat racy lingerie chain Agent Provocateur. I’m not sure whether this is a welcome distraction from medical research or the reward for it.

There is an interesting and worrying piece in the New York Times about dermatologists in the US. The charge is that patients attending with medical skin complaints are treated as second class compared with those patients seeking cosmetic interventions. The latter make more money for the MDs. The insurance company payout for seeing people with ’ordinary’ medical skin complaints is low, say some dermatologists in defence.

There are lots of reasons why I find this disturbing. The ultimate outcome of demand-based medicine means that the largest dollar shouts loudest. But this does not match who is in need of most medical care. Why on earth should patients with serious skin complaints be dealt with less quickly than those who want a few wrinkles pressed out? Medical magazines in the UK frequently offer courses for doctors or nurses wanting to do a bit of cosmetic botox. Dentists, too, are getting in on the act. Is this really a good use of time and training? 

The other thing that bothers me is our apparant obsession with being wrinkle free. What kind of society is it that proclaims itself to think ageism a terrible thing  – but then spends vast amounts of time and money trying to superficially avoid the signs of maturity?

Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer, has published his report today on the ‘principles and next steps’ of medical revalidation. The bottom line seems to be that doctors will have to undergo relicensing every five years. We have annual appraisals already, but appraisals are meant to be supportive and reflective. The new system will have end points of pass or fail.

The BBC are reporting that surgeons “could earn bonuses for successful operations”. Imperial College Healthcare Trust in London are said to be piloting such a scheme. The news has been greeted with general outrage on the BBC’s messageboard, and quite right too. The scheme presumes medical professionalism is dead. I don’t think it’s dead, but it is certainly in need of resuscitation and TLC – or at least a recognition and appreciation that the best doctors act out of the best interests of patients, not themselves.

Margaret McCartney’s Blog

This blog is no longer updated but it remains open as an archive.

A forum on healthcare policy and professional issues, by Glasgow-based GP and FT Weekend columnist Margaret McCartney.

FT Blogs