How Does Mark Siegler Use Metaphors In All Patient-Physician Relationship

All patient-physician relationships can be interpreted through the use of metaphors and or models. Each metaphor/model may be used descriptively or prescriptively, explaining complex ideals such as patient autonomy and the physician decision/treatment process. By using metaphors and models, it gives the general population an illustration of the proposed nature involved in a professional, medical relationship.

Ultimately, the methodology behind metaphors is to attempt to simplify complex issues in hopes of reaching a better understanding of the topic. For professional, medical relationships, metaphors are used to highlight specific features (whether that is in a descriptive or prescriptive way) while also deflating others. In addition, the metaphorical

By investigating a metaphor in a descriptive sense, one is implying that the metaphor describes what is currently occurring within such role/relationship. On the other hand, by using a metaphor in a prescriptive sense, one is saying that such role/relationship ought to be more like it – telling how it should be, not how it is. As an example, Mark Siegler referred to the patient-physician relationship as a possible metaphorical friendship. By looking at such metaphor through a descriptive sense, it would tell one that both the patient and physician enter into the relationship as intimates; therefore, each party would have a deeper care – considering the interest of the other. On the other hand, in a prescriptive sense, it would tell one that the patient-physician relationship ought to be more like a friendship, having the interest of both parties in heart. In the end, each purposed metaphor serves to help guide one into understand the complex relationship between a patient and

Upon first glance, the parent/child paradigm has the ability to be broken up into two similar (yet different) concepts – viewing the child as an infant or adolescent. In this metaphorical construct, the care-giver/physician is placed into the parental role, automatically assuming that they posses a ‘moral sovereignty’ in regard to decision making. On the other end of the spectrum, the patient is placed into the role of a developing child, one that relies upon the adult to a certain extent – the adolescent model provides the patient with more autonomy than the child model. By evaluating the parent/child paradigm prescriptively in connection to the physician-patient relationship, the physician ought to prescribe/inform the patient of the course of treatment (that which the physician believes to be the best for the patient); however, ultimately, the patient retains the ability to either accept or deny the physician’s suggested treatment course. As a result of the position one is placed in through the parent/child paradigm, the physician cannot force the patient into another decision; however, the physician has the ability to deny their ‘nonlogical’ requests/a patient’s choice that “does not make sense.” In the end, the physician’s obligation ought to be to provide the best possible care and to inform; moreover, the patient still holds the ability to reject or accept, yet