This journal is mostly public because most of it contains poetry, quotations, pictures, jokes, videos, and news (medical and otherwise). If you like what you see, you are welcome to drop by, anytime. I update frequently.
Layout by
tessisamessCustomized by penaltywaltz
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Comments
But like any such generalization, the opposite can be said to be true as well, to some extent. I suppose he is implying that most patients killed by earlier medicine would have died anyway?
A bit of context, then: the quote was on one of the slides for the webinar from the AACN (American Association of Critical Care Nurses), titled "Support for the Second Victim: Caring for Our Own".
(Support the Second Victim: Health professionals suffer distress after poor patient outcomes, even if no error occurred.)
So.
Additionally, the current medical and technological advancements produce their own ethical dilemmas: just because you _can_ treat something, does that mean you _should_? and what is the value of quality vs. quantity of life?
*edified, contemplates*
...have you read Atul Gawande's "Being Mortal"? If not, I think you might find it of interest...
(The quote is from a recent webinar; the slides are posted, but not the audio; can let you know when the audio is posted, if you're interested :))