Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 23 December 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a3077
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a3077
Daniel K Sokol, lecturer in medical ethics and law, St Georges, University of London
daniel.sokol@talk21.com
Ethicists are valuable additions to the medical community, not despite but because of their distance from the nitty-gritty of clinical practice
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
My partner, a surgeon, does not tell her colleagues that Im a medical ethicist. I am, instead, a "journalist."
At a working party of anaesthetics last week an intensivist expressed surprise that the meeting proceeded without argument. "I expected the ethicist to be against this pro-doctor proposal," he said, with evident relief. If doctors could design a Dante-esque inferno, medical ethicists would inhabit one of the lowest circles, below the statisticians and lower still than nurse managers and sociologists. Sporting asss ears, we would wallow in the excrement spewed from our mouths, whipped by doctors struck off the General Medical Councils register—a suitable punishment for a group believed by many clinicians to bash doctors and speak drivel.
Three years ago I wrote an editorial for the BMJ arguing for the introduction of clinical ethicists in hospitals.1 One retired GP remarked, sardonically, "So bring in someone from an ivory tower, who
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses