Nursology is regarded as a discipline and a profession, which means that nursology constitutes distinctive knowledge encompassing nursological philosophies, conceptual models, grand theories, middle-range theories, and situation-specific theories (see all content on https://nursology.net and also https://nursology.net/2018/09/24/our-name-why-nursology-why-net/).Medicine, in contrast, is a trade. This assertion is based on my search of literature for several years and pondering the difference between a discipline or a profession and a trade at least since the publication of Donaldson and Crowley’s now classic 1978 article, The Discipline of Nursing. .
I asserted that medicine is a trade in two 2014 publications (Fawcett, 2014a, 2014b) and in 2017, I wrote, under the heading, Medicine is a Trade:
I have never been able to locate any obvious or explicit knowledge that is distinctly medical. A September 18, 2016 search of the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL Complete) using the search term “medical model” yielded 816 publications. An admittedly quick review of a random sample of the retrieved publications revealed that the term medical model was not defined but rather used in a way suggesting that any reader would know what the term means. (Fawcett, 2017, p. 77)
I have continued to ponder whether medicine should be considered a trade and have wondered why no one has challenged my assertion, at least in any publications or blogs I have seen. Therefore, on January 4, 2021, I expanded my search to other sources–Taber’s Cyclopedic Dictionary, the Oxford English Dictionary, and Wikepedia.
The 22nd edition of Taber’s (Venes, 2013) includes no entry for medical model. Medicine is defined as “the act of maintenance of health, and prevention and treatment of disease and illness” (Venes, 2013, p. 1474). No reference to the knowledge needed to perform the act of medicine is evident. The Oxford English Dictionary also includes no entry for medical model, with only a mention of the term in quotations pertaining to two words, technologizing and miasmatist.
However, two definitions of medicine imply a knowledge base (although not necessarily distinctive knowledge). One definition is: “The science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease (in technical use often taken to exclude surgery).” The other definition is: “The medical establishment or profession; professional medical practitioners collectively.”
A search of Wikipedia yielded this statement: “Medical model is the term coined by psychiatrist R. D. Laing in his The Politics of the Family and Other Essays (1971), for the “set of procedures in which all doctors are trained.” It includes complaint, history, physical examination, ancillary tests if needed, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis with and without treatment.” (https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Medical model – Wikipedia). Noteworthy is that Laing did not mention the philosophic, conceptual, or theoretical knowledge that would guide the “set of procedures in which all doctors are trained.”
The content in Wikipedia also included an important negative consequence of adherence to the medical model. This consequence is “In the medical model, the physician was traditionally seen as the expert, and patients were expected to comply with the advice. The physician assumes an authoritarian position in relation to the patient. Because of the specific expertise of the physician, according to the medical model, it is necessary and to be expected. In the medical model, the physician may be viewed as the dominant health care professional, who is the professional trained in diagnosis and treatment.” (https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Medical model – Wikipedia)
My concern with the very idea of “adherence to the medical model” (or adherence to or compliance with anything put forth by a nursologist or a physician) led me to ask “what [do] we mean when we say that a person (called a patient or a client) does not comply with or adhere to a treatment plan. It seems to me that these words reflect the physician’s or the nursologlist’s prescriptions for the patient, which in turn, reflect the physician’s or the nursologist’s power over and control of the patient.” (Fawcett, 2020)
My concern regarding the physician as a professional person is grounded in my inability to identify any distinctive knowledge of medicine that is necessary for the designation of professional in both the OEDO definition of medicine and in the mention in Wikipedia of the professional being “trained,” a word associated with training for a trade.
Of course, I understand that physicians possess a great deal of scientific knowledge. However, that knowledge is of various disciplines, such as anatomy, physiology, histology, and chemistry, not of medicine per se (as there is no distinctive medical knowledge that I have been able to identify),
I have concluded that the so-called “medical model” is a fiction put forth at least since Laing’s (1971) publication by members of the healthcare team (including nursologists) and the general public to ascribe a particular status to a trade. .
Please note that I acknowledge the importance of trades in society. I certainly cannot survive without many tradespersons in my life. However, I maintain that it is important to be very clear about the words we bestow on the members of healthcare teams, words that clearly reflect whether those members belong to a discipline/profession or trade. If members of a discipline/profession, it is necessary to identify the distinctive knowledge that guides practice, and research and education, too..
What do you, a reader of this blog, think? Have you been able to identify distinctive philosophic, conceptual, and theoretical knowledge that would constitute the discipline of medicine? Please add your thoughts to the comments section of this blog. Thank you very much.
References
Donaldson, S. K., & Crowley, D. M. (1978). The discipline of nursing. Nursing Outlook, 26, 113-120.
Fawcett, J. (2014a). Thoughts about collaboration—or is it capitulation? Nursing Science Quarterly, 27, 260-261.
Fawcett, J. (2014b). Thoughts about interprofessional education.Nursing Science Quarterly, 27, 178-179.
Fawcett, J. (2017). Thoughts about nursing conceptual models and the “medical model.” Nursing Science Quarterly, 30, 77-80. (Permission to provide a link to the PDF of this article was granted by the journal editor)
Fawcett, J. (2020, March 17). What is Reflected in a Label about Health? Non-Nursology and Nursology Perspectives. Blog.
Laing, R. D. (1971). The politics of the family and other essays. Routledge
Venes, D. (Ed.). (2013). Taber’s cyclopedic medical dictionary (22nd ed.). F. A. Davis.