MAGIC, MATERNITY, AND MONSTERS: GUARDING THE ART OF MEDICINE BY CREATING THE INTERDICIPLINARIAN HEALER

Abstract

The doctor is not just an encyclopedic reference of medical knowledge and experience. I fear this is the primary role science has given them today. Patients are no longer a manilla chart, bursting at the seams, but a few clicks away on a computer or tablet. Being a human endeavor, an interdisciplinary approach to medical humanities should be incorporated into medical education. The doctor is an important totem in the health experience, especially in the patient's eyes. They must always be humanist role models. This thesis and seminar explore highly interdisciplinary methods to revitalize the importance of narrative and storytelling in the health professions. Not only for pre-med students (to which many honors programs attract) but also for allopathic (MD)/ osteopathic (DO) programs, nursing programs, or other health professional schools. One must remember that doctors spend less time with patients than nurses in the care setting (nurses service and see patients most often, spend more time with them, and usually stand close to patients in the care ward hallways). Still, a physician must be a humanist role model in the care environment. Drawing on the health sciences, philosophy, economics, history, ethics, public health, and psychology can provide insight into the barriers that impede scientific exploration, trustworthiness, and the dissemination of findings that improve health outcomes. Select narratives can help health students understand how science develops, how findings are communicated to the public, and how these processes are evolving through both historical perspectives and contemporary examples of health science practices and science promotion in the USA and globally. The first essay introduces ideas based on observation as fundamental to initiating action and the development of health paradigms. It discusses the epistemic foundations of Galenic humoral medicine, gives examples of bloodletting and lobotomy, and offers a contemporary counterpoint to detrimental practices that persisted for two millennia. Moreover, common misconceptions of science, the public perception of the scientific process, and the quality of research in biomedical research are discussed. The second essay introduces a historical account of the lesser-known Soviet war against genetics contrasting biologist Nikolai Vavilov and agronomist Trofim Lysenko. This essay addresses how rhetoric (pathos, ethos, and logos) originating from political pressures played a role in the development, execution, persistence, and further adaptations of detrimental scientific theories. It includes prominent health communication and health behavior models and how these models are developed based on observation and how planned behavior influences beliefs and attitudes. The third essay includes Thomas Sowell's unique perspectives as a Stanford economist and author of over 40 books. In A Conflict of Visions, Sowell proposed two frameworks that morally guide social visions that are used to realize the “betterment of our society”. This is related to medical paternalism and provokes the conversation of healthcare as a commodity or healthcare as a right. This essay discusses the growing divide between modern sciences and the humanities, its root causes, and implications. Together these essays act as the historical and moral preface for a new class that will seek to 1) Teach students how to critically assess ideas based on merit (not face value/proposals), instill skepticism, and advance a spirit of inquiry through narrative and reflection (storytelling); 2) Give examples of disastrous health practices and 3) Illustrate how politics influence science;4) Contrast health communication in the U.S. and internationally; 5) Enable students to silo-bust and enable cross-talk in their fields by engaging in interdisciplinary discourse; 6) Use a student's pursuit of healthcare to foster a mode of self-discovery and interdisciplinarity.