Health care reform: What history doesn't teach

2Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The paper begins by tracing the historical development of American medicine as practice, profession, and industry from the eighteenth century to the present. This historical outline emphasizes shifting conceptions of physicians and physician ethics. It lays the basis for showing, in the second section, how contemporary controversies about the physician's role in managed care take root in medicine's past. In the final two sections, I revisit both the historical analysis and its application to contemporary debates. I argue that historical narratives can function as "master narratives" that suppress or leave out historical facts. I bring to the surface what is covered up by the master narrative approach, and show its relevance to contemporary ethical debates. I conclude by proposing that preserving the integrity of medicine will require modifying the master narratives we tell about physicians. The integrity of medicine also offers new perspectives for thinking about managed care and the broader topic of health care reform. © 2005 Springer.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jecker, N. S. (2005). Health care reform: What history doesn’t teach. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 26(4), 277–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-005-8184-1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free