Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
In several clinical settings, the patients are often considered as
‘non-persons’(1).
Non-persons have no name; they are known by their diseases or bed
numbers.
Non-persons are objects to be dealt with. They do not qualify for
‘privacy.’
It is all right to intrude into their space -at your convenience- to
probe, palpate and do procedures on them. A common example is the de-
humanising that goes on in most intensive care units.
Non-persons’ feelings and opinions do not count. Non-persons are excluded
in clinical discussions, even in those that involve risk and treatment
preferences. Common examples are bedside discussions on a patient between
a surgeon and an anaesthetist, among doctors or between a doctor and a
nurse. In fact, if the patient concerned tries to communicate with the
professionals, s/he is looked down upon as an ‘interfering patient’.
If one wishes to really practise ‘patient-centred’ medicine, one has
to change ones mindset and treat the patients as persons (human beings)
with individual feelings, opinions and personal preferences.
Patients as Non-Persons
In several clinical settings, the patients are often considered as
‘non-persons’(1).
Non-persons have no name; they are known by their diseases or bed
numbers.
Non-persons are objects to be dealt with. They do not qualify for
‘privacy.’
It is all right to intrude into their space -at your convenience- to
probe, palpate and do procedures on them. A common example is the de-
humanising that goes on in most intensive care units.
Non-persons’ feelings and opinions do not count. Non-persons are excluded
in clinical discussions, even in those that involve risk and treatment
preferences. Common examples are bedside discussions on a patient between
a surgeon and an anaesthetist, among doctors or between a doctor and a
nurse. In fact, if the patient concerned tries to communicate with the
professionals, s/he is looked down upon as an ‘interfering patient’.
If one wishes to really practise ‘patient-centred’ medicine, one has
to change ones mindset and treat the patients as persons (human beings)
with individual feelings, opinions and personal preferences.
Dr K.R. Sethuraman. MD, PGDHE.
Founder President - Society of EQUIP
<http://www.geocities.com/equip_india/>
Reference
1. K.R. Sethuraman. Communication skills in clinical practice. Jaypee
Brothers Medical Publishers, 2001: 7-8
Competing interests: No competing interests