Abstract
AbstractAs empathy gains importance within academia, we propose this review as an attempt to bring clarity upon the diverse and widely debated definitions and conceptions of empathy within the medical field. In this paper, we first evaluate the limits of the Western mainstream medical culture and discuss the origins of phenomena such as dehumanization and detached concern as well as their impacts on patient care. We then pass on to a structured overview of the debate surrounding the notion of clinical empathy and its taxonomy in the medical setting. In particular, we present the dichotomous conception of clinical empathy that is articulated in the debate around cognitive empathy and affective empathy. We thus consider the negative impacts that this categorization brings about. Finally, we advocate for a more encompassing, holistic conception of clinical empathy; one that gives value to a genuine interest in welcoming, acknowledging and responding to the emotions of those suffering. Following this line of reasoning, we advance the notion of ‘empathic concern’, a re-conceptualization of clinical empathy that finds its source in Halpern in Med Health Care Philos (2014) 17:301–311 engaged curiosity. We ultimately advance Narrative Medicine as an approach to introduce, teach and promote such an attitude among medical trainees and practitioners.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Education,Health(social science)
Reference109 articles.
1. AAMC, P. 1998. Report II: Contemporary Issues in Medicine: Medical Informatics and Population Health. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges 25.
2. Alma, Hans A., and Adri Smaling. 2006. The meaning of empathy and imagination in health care and health studies. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Wellbeing 1, 195–211. http://www.ijqhw.net/index.php/qhw/article/view/4934.
3. Aring, Charles D. 1958. Sympathy and empathy. Journal of the American Medical Association 167 (4): 448–452.
4. Astell, Ann W. 2004. Saintly mimesis, contagion, and empathy in the thought of Rene Girard, Edith Stein and Simone Weil. Shofar an International Journal of Jewish Studies 22 (2): 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1353/sho.2004.000.
5. Avery, J. K. 1985. Lawyers tell what turns some patients litigious. Med Malpractice Rev, 2, pp. 35–37.
Cited by
30 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献