At 18:46 08/10/2010, you wrote:
> > I=92m wondering what =93the nature and status of the gp-pat relationship=
>=94
> > actually is.
> >
> > Is there an agreed definition?
> >
> >
>Not really, I kinda meant that it varies from pt to pt and dr to dr, and
>even day to day. It's all very contextual.
>
>:)
>
>Paul
I agree but perhaps there is a starting point for new patients.
The first thing is that it is a professional relationship, and a
professional relationship with boundaries that should be known to
both parties. More than that the relationship itself may be used to
therapeutic effect, so the nature of the relationship is not without
importance.
The boundaries are starkly different from normal relationship
boundaries. Intimate questions may be asked and intimate
examinations may be undertaken but neither imply intimacy in the social sense.
Patients and doctors sometimes come to like each other, that seems to
me be a positive.
Patients and doctors ought to be able to trust each other.
Neither party is free to be rude to the other.
Neither party is free to be violent to the other.
Starting from a set of behaviours that imply respect (from each to
the other) seems to me to be a sound policy, both for patients and doctors.
I've never felt any differently when a patient, and I've never
expected anything different to underlie consultations by colleagues,
though the exact behaviours used to communicate respect may vary.
Julian
|