4.6 Article

Professionalism: The Wrong Tool to Solve the Right Problem?

期刊

ACADEMIC MEDICINE
卷 95, 期 6, 页码 860-863

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003266

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Medical schools and other higher education institutions across the United States are grappling with how to respond to racism on and off campus. Institutions and their faculty, administrators, and staff have examined their policies and practices, missions, curricula, and the representation of racial and ethnic minority groups among faculty, staff, and students. In addition, student-led groups, such as White Coats for Black Lives, have emerged to critically evaluate medical school curricula and advocate for change. Another approach to addressing racism has been a focus on the role of professionalism, which has been variably defined as values, traits, behaviors, morality, humanism, a role, an identity, and even a social contract. In this article, the authors consider the potential role that professionalism might play in responding to racism in medical education and at medical schools. They identify 3 concerns central to this idea. The first concern is differing definitions of what the problem being addressed really is. Is it isolated racist acts or institutional racism that is a reflection of white supremacy? The second concern is the notion that professionalism may be used as a tool of social control to maintain the interests of the social groups that dominate medicine. The third concern is that an overly simplistic application of professionalism, regardless of how the problem of racism is defined, may result in trainees practicing professionalism that is performative rather than internally motivated. The authors conclude that professionalism may complement a more systematic and holistic approach to addressing racism and white supremacy in medical education, but it is an insufficient stand-alone tool to address this core problem.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据