This paper explores the notion of ‘expert’ health care practitioner in the context of critical thinking and health care education where scientific rather than philosophical inquiry has been the dominant mode of thought. A number of factors have forced are appraisal in this respect: the challenge brought about by the identification of complex ethical issues in clinical situations; medicine's `solving' of many of the simple health problems; the recognition that uncertainty is a common and perhaps innate feature of clinical practice; (...) debate about the concepts of illness and disease; plus insights from psychology,sociology and medical anthropology. Together these have prompted alternative ways of thinking which have the aim of identifying the best rather than the right decision (where best equates to good and right equates to correct in the sense of true or approved). It is argued that phronesis adds a necessary corrective dimension to modern Western medicine's over-emphasis on techne and is one of the factors that differentiates novice from expert practitioner. However, this attracts certain conflicts of interest: phronesis can only be gained and assessed from experience of praxis; agencies with legitimate interests in medicine such as government and professional registering bodies require more substantive criteria. (shrink)

Abstract.This paper critiques particular aspects of the published UK government Department of Health’s proposal to promote ‘The Expert Patient’ as a way of enhancing patient autonomy and reducing reliance on limited health care resources. Although the broad aims of the report are supported the detail is criticised on the basis that lack of clarity over key terms, including ‘expert’ ‘illness’ and ‘disease’, means that there is no clear focus for action and threatens to undermine the effectiveness of the proposals.

Personal integrity is often seen as a core value for delivering ethical healthcare. This paper will explore what this might mean and particularly what place integrity has in a multi‐professional healthcare system. Two opposing arguments can be made: the first is that the multi‐professional nature of modern healthcare means that personal integrity is at best a futile luxury and at worst, an obstacle to delivering affordable high‐quality care to large populations. The converse is that without personal integrity healthcare loses its (...) humanity and becomes mere biological and social engineering. Part of the analysis rests on whether integrity is primarily a personally held moral framework or whether it is a social concept. Chester Calhoun's analysis, in which she identifies the integrated‐self, personal identity, and (morally) clean‐hands as three pictures of integrity, is used as the basis for suggesting that integrity is a rich and complex social virtue through which the individual is able to demonstrate their relationship with the values and mores of the communities of which they are members. In addition, I will argue that integrity is not a value itself, but is a framework through which one or more sets of those values that characterize the communities of which the person is a part, can be expressed. Because a person may belong to many communities – nation, gender, religion, family, profession, trade, sport, etc. – each individual has their own unique meta‐set of values that informs their personal sense of integrity. However, in specific circumstances, conflicts may arise between this personal global sense and the set of values associated with one community. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology 10.3 (2003) 267-271 [Access article in PDF] Likening Strikes Twice:Psychiatry, Osteopathy, and the Likeness Argument Stephen Tyreman PRIMA FACIE PSYCHIATRY and osteopathy do not appear to share much common ground; however, in at least one important respect they pursue similar goals. By seeking to consolidate their independent identities, each is challenging the dominance of the medical model. This involves justifying what they do and why (...) they should exist as independent professions. With osteopathy the situations are different in the United Kingdom and the United States, but in both countries the same challenge exists (Howell 1999; Tyreman 1998). Broadly, it boils down to how osteopathy is positioned in relation to conventional (orthodox or allopathic) medicine and, particularly, to how its practice and theory is validated by scientific methodology. Howell, an allopathic practitioner, sums up the situation as he sees it in the United States by concluding in his New England Journal of Medicine editorial, "many people—even osteopaths—question what it is that osteopathy has to offer that is distinctive.... The paradox is this: if osteopathy has become the functional equivalent of allopathy, what is the justification for its continued existence? And if there is value in therapy that is uniquely osteopathic—that is, based on osteopathic manipulation or other techniques—why should its use be limited to osteopaths?" (1999, 1468). In the United Kingdom, with the passing of the Osteopaths Act in 1993 and the establishment of statutory self-regulation, the profession has been trying to define itself by identifying its raison d'être and the extent to which it aligns itself with medical assumptions.Fueling this dilemma, which in different ways affects psychiatry and osteopathy (and other professions supplementary to, allied with, or complementary to medicine), is the same question: does the paradigm of physical illness, explained and validated by the biological sciences, provide the basic model for understanding and treating all forms of illness—physical, mental, and functional? How are the concepts of illness and disease to be defined and how do such definitions relate to the justification for treatment and other health interventions?Neil Pickering has produced an interesting contribution to the mental illness side of this debate by analyzing the likeness argument, wherein mental illness is said to be a real illness and therefore a legitimate reason for providing treatment, because, in significant respects, it has the same features as other forms of illness acknowledged as being real illnesses. In criticizing the argument he identifies two key assumptions: "that there are features of human conditions... that decide what category or kind, these conditions are a member of" and "that, with respect to the [End Page 267] presence or absence of these features, a condition... is describable independent of the category it is assigned to" (2003, p. 245). He rightly points out that these assumptions do not stand up to analysis and therefore, if indeed they are fundamental assumptions for the argument, the likeness argument must fail. His reason for requiring the argument to fail is that it is not possible to describe (illness) features independently of the category to which they are assigned, which undermines both key assumptions. Therefore all such attempts must fail. He is not clear about what replaces it other than implying that it entails value judgments and human selection.My comments are not so much criticisms of Pickering's conclusion, which I think is correct, but of his reasons for coming to that conclusion, which I think are based on false assumptions; with a different emphasis his argument could be made much stronger.Pickering's argument appears to rest on (at least) three assumptions: he explicitly states that (for the purposes of his argument) illness and disease can be used interchangeably; second, that physical illness is a natural kind; third, that for conventional/allopathic medicine, illness is best understood and explained in physical terms. In addition, and partly as a consequence of the above, there is an implicit assumption that physical illness is the standard against which all other claims to be illnesses should be tested; that is, that... (shrink)

This commentary on Bengt Brülde's paper on mental disorder in this edition argues that this insightful analysis of the way values inform the concept of mental disorder may also apply to physical disorders. Using the example of the way values are ascribed in both visual and performing arts, and using Rudyard Kipling's leitmotif " but is it art?" taken from his poem "The Conundrum of the Workshops", the question of what is 'good' art is addressed using the same questions applied (...) in the paper to mental disorder. It is concluded that the questions: where is the evaluative element located? what kind of values or evaluations do we rely on? are there specific standards against which to judge the value? how do the judgments enter the picture? can be applied just as usefully to physical disorders. (shrink)

Richard sykes’s paper on medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) and its criticism of the inference that they must therefore be psychogenic makes a valuable contribution to the debate around issues of terminology in diagnosis and medical explanation. I would like to broaden the debate by suggesting that looking more explicitly at the context in which terms are used can enhance both clarity and honesty, which is Sykes’s main objective. In doing this, however, I want to defend the use of the term (...) “functional” in some contexts, and also to challenge the inference that physical and mental are antonyms. The loss of the term “functional” in a diagnostic context would, I believe, be a mistake. There is not time .. (shrink)

Abstract.This introduction outlines key elements in a recent United Kingdom Department of Health report that, it is hoped, will change attitudes, expectations and practices in the care of patients with chronic illness [Department of Health: 2001, The Expert Patient: A New Approach to Chronic Disease Management for the 21st Century. London: Department of Health.]. The findings of the Task Force are summarised as accurately as possible and without comment. Analysis and comment can be found in the accompanying papers.

In recent years so-called Complementary and Alternative Medicine practices have made significant political and professional advances particularly in the United Kingdom : osteopathy and chiropractic were granted statutory self-regulation in the 1990s effectively giving them more professional autonomy and independence than health care professions supplementary to medicine ; the practice of acupuncture is widespread within the National Health Service for pain control; and homoeopathy is offered to patients by a few General Practitioners alongside conventional treatments. These developments have had a (...) number of consequences: one is that both CAM and Conventional and Orthodox Medical professions have had to reappraise their professional identity. In manual therapy for example, questions have been asked about the differences between physiotherapy, osteopathy and chiropractic, and what the justification is for having separate professions. A wider question concerns the relationship between CAM and COM; are CAM distinct professions or should they, as has happened to a limited extent in the UK, be absorbed into the broader field of ‘ Medicine ’ or ‘Health Care’ as adjunctive therapies. CAM professions have also had to develop, implement and enforce codes of practice for practitioners and clarify the scope of practice within a profession. At the heart of these issues lies the need to identify and clarify professional values. A key claim of CAM professions is that their practice is distinct and the outcome of treatment at least as effective and in many cases more effective than with conventional therapies. In addition, what counts as effective outcome is often different from conventional medical understanding, involving more subtle humanitarian considerations, for example. Three values are identified as being commonly held across CAM professions. These are: offering ‘natural’ treatment; being patient rather than disease focussed; and being holistic. However, these may not be as distinctive of CAM as is claimed either because the meaning is unclear or because COM professions claim similar values. The paper argues that the values that inform ‘good practice’ and ‘effective outcome’ should be seen as distinct components of professional competence. This has implications for establishing professional identity and codes of practice. (shrink)

This paper explores causation in the context of health care practice, in particular, primary care. Causation in health care is necessarily premised on the concepts of disease and illness and the ways they are deviations from health. The paper reviews and broadly categorises concepts of illness most commonly found in the literature in terms of the biomedical, biopsychosocial, and agency models. It is argued that although each model has its place in the gamut of health care practice, primary care implicitly (...) or explicitly uses an agency model most frequently. By explicitly acknowledging the role that patients’ values and expectations have in utilising their physiological, psychological and social capacities to live their lives, clinicians can gain a clearer understanding of how a situation has come about and why it has become a health problem for the patient. (shrink)

In recent years limitations in the biomedical conceptualisation of health and illness have been well documented and a variety of alternative explanations produced to replace or supplement it. One such is Fredrik Svenaeus’s philosophy of medical practice, which is a development of Hans-Georg Gadamer and Martin Heideggers’ phenomenological and hermeneutical writings. This paper explores two texts, a short story by H. G. Wells, The Country of the Blind, and a poem by William Carlos Williams, Danse Russe to add further insight (...) into the ideas proposed by Svenaeus. Both texts were written before either Gadamer or Heidegger published their work. Analysis of the texts reveal examples of Heidegger’s understanding of ‘da-sein’, human-being, as the fundamental of human existence—how we relate to our ‘life-world’—together with its conditions including the tools we use to engage with and the moods that interpret the world. Emerging from this core relationship of being are the phenomena of health and illness, which are conceptualised as home-like (Heimischkeit) and un-home-like (Unheimlichkeit) being-in-the-world. In the texts the sense of home-like (and un-home-like) being is an ontological ‘web of significance’, to use Heidegger’s phrase, that creates, rather than results from a person’s psychological state. One factor that is not fully explicated in the philosophical accounts is the role that behaviour (as the physical-relating of a person) plays as a pre-requisite for agency, the ability to act in taken-for-granted ways. A person’s sense of authenticity, the extent to which someone makes their own choices rather than being led by what ‘others’ say, is linked with their ability to physically engage with and relate to their ‘life-world’. Finally, similarities between the ontological wholeness of poetry—the meaning structure of poetry—and of Dasein are noted. (shrink)