Modern vs. Hippocratic Oath

reject such a life (Tomasini, 2014). Third, the Hippocratic Oath is an oath taken by all medical

doctor takes an oath that he or she will do everything in their power to keep a patient alive. But

17. Pellegrino argues for a three-tiered system of obligations incumbent upon physicians. They are in ascending order of ethical sensitivity.

After ensuring the preservation of medicinal practices and knowledge, the consequences of it are realized through guiding ideas. The Hippocratic Oath affirms, “I will keep [my patients] from harm and injustice.” Doctors swear by contributing to the wellbeing of patients, ignoring the various personal effects of ego, sexual interest and human tendency to gossip. Doctors must be able to admit to inability in order to make sound judgements. This would mean diagnosis to the best of their ability, and nothing beyond their ability: “I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment" (Hippocrates). The oath calls on doctors not to abuse their societal power or fall prey to their desires: “I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations" (Hippocrates). The oath further protects the patient’s emotional wellbeing by restricting the doctor from disclosing details surrounding the patient’s physical condition. The oath makes clear, “What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about" (Hippocrates). With the words “In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art"

Although all honorable doctors do their best to uphold the Hippocratic Oath, doctors unwittingly go against it when they emotionally detach themselves from their patients; therefore, they create unintended harm.

Elite groups and associations have developed creeds or oaths throughout history. Doctors, lawyers, Army Rangers, Navy SEALs, and knights all aspire to hold to their directives. These oaths outline a set of values, and a code of conduct by which the group’s initiates are expected to hold. The oaths taken by these warrior classes are important for trust between members that, in grave circumstances, a behavior in accordance with high standards is to be expected. On a different professional level, a lawyer’s or doctor’s oath is to the people they serve. These oaths serve to instill confidence in the professional-to-patient relationship by establishing a standard of professional accountability within their respective fields. The Hippocratic Oath is purported to be a foundation for ethics and the practice of medicine. Though it exists in different versions, depending on the institution, the general themes and function remain the same (Markel). Any oath taken is meant to elevate the level of expectations for services rendered. In practice, however, especially in cases of medical oaths, it appears that the oaths are ceremonial and apparently obsolete. A survey conducted in 2012 noted that very few physicians had better than a rudimentary knowledge of the content of The Hippocratic Oath (Jhala and Jhala 279). If the Hippocratic Oath or any oath is intended to be the moral and ethical compass for physicians, it should be taken with an enforceable level of accountability and

Included in the Hippocratic Oath, the Declaration of Geneva, and the American Medical Association’s articulations of the responsibilities of a physician, include the phrases “free from harm”, “health of the patient first consideration” and “obligation to relieve pain and suffering”.

In 5th century BCE, a Greek philosopher named Hippocrates wrote the phrase “I will not give a drug that is deadly to anyone if asked [for it], nor will suggest the ways to such a counsel”(Miles, 2004). This passage is apart of a written document that is now known as the Hippocratic Oath (Appendix A). The philosophers of ancient Greece were aware of the medical predicaments that a physician would ultimately face while practicing medicine. Today, the oath has become an ethical code for the physicians to uphold and apply in their profession. Why is this phrase important enough to be included in this document? Some view this passage as the code that prohibits physicians from lending their abilities for the executions of prisoners. Others

1. Attention Material: The Hippocratic Oath proclaims “I will keep the sick from harm and injustice. I will

Although the Hippocratic Oath is generally upheld within modern medicinal practices, in many cases people of different culture or socioeconomic statuses are not treated to the level they are due; therefore, there is an inequity of care within the US, contradicting the oath that professionals claim to abide by.

So long as I maintain this Oath faithfully and without corruption, may it be granted to me to partake of life fully and the practice of my art, gaining the respect of all men for all time. However, should I transgress this Oath and violate it, may the opposite be my fate. This is a fragment of a vow known as the Hippocratic oath, which doctors take on when they are about to become physicians. This oath serves not only as a guideline of what is expected of them but also sets up a sort of boundary for the actions regarding their patients. This oath furthermore impedes doctors from having inhumane treatment or even attempt in most instances actions that benefit their own agenda instead of their patients. Of course this in itself is a

The Hippocratic Oath, is “First, do no harm”. Being a doctor is a profession solely dedicated to helping others, but what about when helping hurts? Often times the doctor doesn’t fully understand the patient due to a language or cultural barrier. A misunderstanding between the doctor and the patient can cause the patient to mistrust and discount everything the doctor says. The only thing worse than a noncompliant patient is a seemingly compliant patient. Although the western medical system has proven to be effective in its precision and accuracy, it is only as effective as the patients that make up the system.

At the start of this this course, I did not think much of how bioethics and legal medicine were connected. Week after week I am beginning to understand how important it is to evolve into a society with guidelines to better serve not only physicians but, all patients as well. In “Medical and Ethical Encounters” by John R. Carlisle, he enlightens us on how in actuality, good practice in law and medicine, is the gateway to superior health care in the united states. In the mid-1970s Beauchamp and Childress formulated a statement known as “the four principles of bioethics. Autonomy of a person to have his say respected by the physician is vital. Beneficence, to always promote health and wellbeing ultimately with an outcome of good over bad. Nonmalfeasance

A doctor takes an oath that he or she will do everything in their power to keep a patient alive. But they also take an oath that they will do whatever is in the best interest of their patient.

Imagine you are injured or sick and have sought a doctor’s help. Although you trusted your doctor, something, something seemingly very in control of the doctor, went wrong. You are angry and confused, but also think of the commonality of medical malpractice. So, why do doctors, who are supposed to help, harm? Though many flaws influence it, malpractice can be, and often is unintentional. Most doctors aren’t trained to harm their patients. Inexperience and lack of medical discovery led to unintentional suffering of the patient. Personal flaws, like lack of willingness to abandon previous medical methods and shortcomings in communication also harm patients. Further reasons why doctors harm are socio-medical understandings that breed hate, prejudices stemming from a society’s belief about certain people, such as the medical practice under the Nazi regime. Additionally, displayed in the case of Ignác Semmelweis, judgement of one to oneself can be detrimental to any progress one’s ideas could make. We will examine these concepts through Jerome Groopman’s “Flesh-and-Blood Decision Making”, Sherwin Nuland’s The Doctors’ Plague and Barbara Bachrach’s “In the Name of Public Health”. Those who practice medicine are, unfortunately, unfree from the imperfections that plague all of humanity. Through these intimate and varied faults, doctors do harm.