Clinical Paternalistic Model and Problematic Situation: A Critical Evaluation of Clinical Counseling
Background: Many of health system services are done in clinical counseling. A patient’s expectation of clinical consultation and physician office visits is to obtain diagnostic-remedial results, while such an expectation can be fulfilled only through an active relationship between the doctor and the patient. The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of doctor- patient interaction in an educational clinic in southern Iran. Methods: This is a conversation analysis based on critical approach. So, 33 clinical consultations were analyzed critically. Results: Results showed that paternalistic model is the overall pattern in consultations. This leads to limitation of the patients’ opportunity to participate in their diagnosis and treatment. Powers’ asymmetrical relations lead to conditions in which physicians determine the clinical counseling process. Also, physicians determine the subject of consultation in the counseling period. In this situation, the patients’ concerns were ignored. This ignorance leads to the patients’ suppression in problematic situations. The main point is that the clinical counseling occurs in one general contract that is unwritten but has been known for the two sides of interaction. Conclusion: Clinical counseling can be an active consultation when it included the symmetrical distribution of power and the patient has an active participation in the consultation. Therefore, the new patient-centered approaches can be an appropriate model for access to a type of consultation based on symmetrical power distribution between physician and patient.
Cordella M. The Dynamic Consultation A discourse
analytical study of doctor–patient relation. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2004.
Parsons T. The Social System. England: Routledge;
Turner, BH. Introduction. In The Social System.
England: Routledge; 1991.
Armstrong, D. Bodies of Knowledge/Knowledge of
Bodies. In Jones, C. and Porter, R. (eds) Reassessing
Foucault. Power, medicine and the body, London:
Driver, F. Bodies in Space: Foucault’s Account of
Disciplinary Power. Bodies. In Jones, C. and Porter,
R. (eds) Reassessing Foucault. Power, medicine and the
body. London: Routledge; 1994: 113- 131.
Foucault M. The Birth of the Clinic. An Archeology
of Medical Perception. Sheridan AM (translate). UK:
Tavistock Publications Limited; 1973.
McGowen, R. Power and Humanity, or Foucault Among
the Historians. In Jones, C. and Porter, R. Reassessing
Foucault. Power, medicine and the body. London:
Routledg; 1994: 91-112.
Habermas, J. Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2.
Lifeworld and System. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1978.
Scambler, G. Habermas a nd t he Power of M edical
Experties. In Scambler, G. (eds) Medical Sociology.
Major Themes in Health and Social Welfare. USA:
Routledge; 2005: 138-162.
Scambler, G. and Britten, N. System, lifeworld and
doctor–patient interaction Issues of trust in a changing
world. In Scambler, G. (eds) Habermas, critical theory
and Health. London: Routledge; 2001: 45-67.
Powers, P. The Philosophical Foundations of Foucaultian
Discourse Analysis. Critical Approaches to Discourse
Analysis across Disciplines 2007; 1(2): 18-34.
Barry ChA, Stevenson FA, Britten N, Bradley CP.
Giving voice to the lifeworld. More humane, more
effective medical care? A qualitative study of doctor–
patient relation in general practice. Soc Sci Med 2001;
Fairclough N. Discourse and Social Changes. USA:
Polity Press; 1992.
Králová P. Power Relations in doctor- patient relation.
Kamenice: Masaryk University; 2012 [cited: 2013 Aug
. available from: http://is.muni.cz/th/361459/ff_b/
Islam G, Zyphur M. Ways of interacting: The
standardization of relation in medical training. Hum
Relat 2007; 6(5): 769-92.
Mishler, GE. The Discourse of Medicine: dialectics
of medical interviews. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex
Publishing Company; 1984.
Heritage and myard
American Sociological Association. Code of Ethics
and Policies and Procedures of the ASA Committee
on Professional Ethics. 1997 [updated 2008 May 10;
cited: 2014 Jan 1]. Available from: http://www.asanet.
Wells K. Narrative Inquiry. USA: Oxford University
Gee, JP. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis, Theory
and Method. Third Edition. New York: Routledge; 2010.
Emanuel JE, Emanuel LL. Four Model of the Physicianpatient
relationship. Am J Med Sci 1992; 267(16): 5-13.
Merriam- webster online dictionary. Marginalize.
[cited: 2014 22 May] Available from: http://www.
McKinney, J. PTSD Patients Marginalized by the
Current Healthcare System. 2012. Available from:
Atkinson, P. M edical Talk a nd M edical Work.
London: S age p ub; 1995.
Bensing, J. Bridging the gap. The separate worlds
of Evidence-based medicine and p atient-centered
medicine. Patient Educ Couns 2000; 39: 17-25.
Forman, H. Nursing Leadership For Patient-Centered
Care. Authenticity Presence Intuition Expertise. New
York: Springer Publishing Company; 2011.
Mengel, MB. The Systemic Patient-Centered Method.
Introduction to Clinical Skills : A Patient-centered
Textbook. Mengel, MB, Scott, AF (eds). Plenum Press;
Watson, J., Frampton, SB. Human Interactions and
Relationship – centered Caring. Putting Patients
First. Best Practices in Patient-Centered Care. Second
Edition. Editors Frampton, SB. and Charmel PA; 2009.
Pendleton D, Schofield Th, Tate P, Havelock P. The New
Consultation Developing doctor–patient communication.
New York: Oxford University press; 2003.
Sadati AK, Iman MT, Lankarani KB. Medical
Paraclinical Standards, Political Economy of Clinic,
and Patients’ Clinical Dependency; A Critical
Conversation Analysis of Clinical Counseling in South
of Iran. IJCBNM 2014; 2(3): 157-68.
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
pISSN: 2345-2218 eISSN: 2345-3893