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.
Today while religious groups seek shelter from those who would persecute them for practicing their faith; just as others seek protection from persecution from those who have different racial, creed, color, sex and sexual orientation; it is comforting to note that one group of people – PHYSICIANS - have been following an Oath established long ago, which already addresses these personal choices and calls upon those taking that Oath to place our responsibilities to our patients above all else.
Both the Hippocratic Oath to which one swears to “remain free of all intentional injustice” and the modern version; The Physicians Oath from The Declaration of Geneva – developed following the atrocities of Nazi Germany - which more specifically states:
“I will not permit considerations of religion, nationality, race, party politics or social standing to intervene between my duty and my patient;”
reflects standards laid out for those of us in Medicine and Healthcare, which exceeds that seen in much of society.
When the question is asked, should religious beliefs be treated as any other personal choice, we can only ask – How could a Physician or Healthcare provider answer anything other than in the affirmative?!
Competing interests:
No competing interests
21 February 2020
Richard M Fleming
Physicist-Cardiologist
Matthew R Fleming, BS, NRP (FHHI-OI-Camelot); Tapan K. Chaudhuri, MD (Eastern Virginia Medical School); William C. Dooley, MD (University of Oklahoma Health Science Center)
The Importance of the Hippocratic Oath and the Physician’s Oath From the Declaration of Geneva. Re: Religious beliefs should be treated as any other personal choice
Today while religious groups seek shelter from those who would persecute them for practicing their faith; just as others seek protection from persecution from those who have different racial, creed, color, sex and sexual orientation; it is comforting to note that one group of people – PHYSICIANS - have been following an Oath established long ago, which already addresses these personal choices and calls upon those taking that Oath to place our responsibilities to our patients above all else.
Both the Hippocratic Oath to which one swears to “remain free of all intentional injustice” and the modern version; The Physicians Oath from The Declaration of Geneva – developed following the atrocities of Nazi Germany - which more specifically states:
“I will not permit considerations of religion, nationality, race, party politics or social standing to intervene between my duty and my patient;”
reflects standards laid out for those of us in Medicine and Healthcare, which exceeds that seen in much of society.
When the question is asked, should religious beliefs be treated as any other personal choice, we can only ask – How could a Physician or Healthcare provider answer anything other than in the affirmative?!
Competing interests: No competing interests