tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-168082693469796351.post5976813309201029112..comments2023-10-11T08:25:52.392-04:00Comments on hemodynamics: What's a doctor? (When in doubt, return to Oliver Sacks.)Joe Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00869712616542504302noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-168082693469796351.post-48965358088480578382007-04-11T11:42:00.000-04:002007-04-11T11:42:00.000-04:00I'm already arguing with myself about this post. T...I'm already arguing with myself about this post. The obvious objection to the guide/consultant model of the doctor is during emergencies. Here perhaps the guide is a better model: if you start falling off a cliff, a guide is supposed to help pull you back to safety. But that's not with the intention of forever holding you up; the idea is that mostly you move on your own power, but sometimes you will not be able to walk down your own path until you are pulled back up onto it. <BR/><BR/>In my conversations thus far, most of the doctors who have disagreed with how I describe the doctor-patient relationship have focused on this moment. But for now, I see this as the exception to the rule rather than the defining feature of the relationship. <BR/><BR/>Any trauma surgeon would object to this; even here, though, the good surgeon is explaining to a patient or his proxy what is physically going on, what interventions are being contemplated, and what the risks of those interventions are. This might still be a role of guide, but a very proscribed and specialized one: perhaps the role is more like a ferry captain who steers you across a river of fire. Hopefully, though, it's you (or someone you trust) who decides that you want to cross, and why.Joe Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00869712616542504302noreply@blogger.com