Medical ethics : a lecture, delivered December 23, 1843, before the Ohio Medical Lyceum / by John P. Harrison.

  • Harrison, John P. (John Pollard), 1796-1849.
Date:
1843
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Medical ethics : a lecture, delivered December 23, 1843, before the Ohio Medical Lyceum / by John P. Harrison. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the National Library of Medicine (U.S.), through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the National Library of Medicine (U.S.)

    15/20
    Rule 4. If a patient is very ill let his physician suggest the pro- priety of additional counsel to the friends, and if asked, let him name his preference, but if another is preferred he should acqui- esce in the selection. There are two grounds upon which you may object to a parti< ular individual in the profession as a partici- pant in the consultation. First, if he be a retailer of nostrums, or patent medicines, to his patients, and is, to his certain know- ledge guilty of overt acts derogatory to the character of a respect- able physician. Secondly, if he has pursued towards you a crooked, or aggressive, course of conduct. If he has by intrigue and indirection, or by open and declared hostility, endeavoured to circumvent, and prostrate your reputation, then you are justi- fied in not meeting him. It is obvious that the nostrum monger is unfit to be made a partaker in the consultations of honorable men:—for he might urge us to give his nostrum, and thus either degrade us in our own estimation, and in the opinion of the patient and friends, or upon our non-compliance of his suggestion have us dismissed. The mere fact that a man is not a graduate, or that we believe him to be of weak intellect, or that he entertains views of disease variant from our pathological opinions, will not warrant a refusal on our part to have him called in to confer with us on the case of our patient. The terrible sin of being a young man is sometimes the occa- sion of exclusion from a consultation. This may however be forgiven when we remember that even old men are not a'ways wise, neither do the aged always understand judgment, and that wisdom is grey hair to man and an unspotted life is old age. We should not be averse to consultations, when they are soli- cited by the patient, or his friends. They conduce eminently, when properly conducted, to the advantage of the sick, and are highly profitable, in more ways than one, to the faculty. They are promotive of professional amenity, and instrumental in the advancement of an enlightened authentic experience. When a time is set for the meeting of the medical conferees we should be punctilious in our attendance at the stated minute, and not subject our professional brethren to the inconvenience of waiting for our arrival, some ten, fifteen, or twenty minutes after the pe- riod stipulated. Rule 5. Should there be a disagreement between the attend- ing physician, and the consulting practitioner, let there be no disputatious wrangling had, but let the difficulty be suggested to the friends—and let them determine either to have additional aid, or the withdrawal of one of the physicians. The consulting physician should decline attendance where the discrepancy of