![]() ![]() Today’s relationship is one of equals, with the professional adviser giving his or her fellow citizen useful advice. ![]() That relationship is very different from the relationship predicated on an image of disease striking the innocent victim, whose suffering can be alleviated only by the healthcare professional with his huge God-given skill. Many of the encounters between healthcare professionals and the public are not about healing as such, but about the activities of normal life-making choices about lifestyle, optional services we might want, or advice on matters such as fertility or cosmetic surgery. The healthcare professional is the healer, while the recipient of healthcare services is the healed, and does not need to take a part in any decision making or in any thinking about alternatives.īut there is another argument for removing the use of the word patient from the vocabulary of the relationship between the healthcare professional and user, the argument we all too often forget. The passive patient will do what he or she is told, and will then wait patiently to recover. It is that the user of services will remain passive in sickness, allowing the healthcare professional to take the active part and tell the user what to do. The active patient is a contradiction in terms, and it is the assumption underlying the passivity that is the most dangerous. The patient, in this language, is truly passive-bearing whatever suffering is necessary and tolerating patiently the interventions of the outside expert. Patient comes from the Latin “patiens,” from “patior,” to suffer or bear. The user is described simply as suffering, while the healthcare professional has a title, be it nurse or doctor, physiotherapist or phlebotomist. The word “patient” conjures up a vision of quiet suffering, of someone lying patiently in a bed waiting for the doctor to come by and give of his or her skill, and of an unequal relationship between the user of healthcare services and the provider. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |