Hardy Carter
Department of Philosophy, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Ave., FAO 280, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA.
Med Health Care Philos. 2017 Jun;20(2):237-248. doi: 10.1007/s11019-016-9746-x.
Recent studies have revealed a drop in the ability of physicians to empathize with their patients. It is argued that empathy training needs to be provided to both medical students and physicians in order to improve patient care. While it may be true that empathy would lead to better patient care, it is important that the right theory of empathy is being encouraged. This paper examines and critiques the prominent explanation of empathy being used in medicine. Focusing on the component of empathy that allows us to understand others, it is argued that this understanding is accomplished through a simulation. However, simulation theory is not the best explanation of empathy for medicine, since it involves a limited perspective in which to understand the patient. In response to the limitations and objections to simulation theory, interaction theory is presented as a promising alternative. This theory explains the physicians understanding of patients from diverse backgrounds as an ability to learn and apply narratives. By explaining how we understand others, without limiting our ability to understand various others, interaction theory is more likely than simulation theory to provide better patient care, and therefore is a better theory of empathy for the medical field.
最近的研究显示,医生对患者产生共情的能力有所下降。有人认为,需要对医学生和医生都进行共情培训,以改善患者护理。虽然共情可能会带来更好的患者护理这一点或许没错,但鼓励正确的共情理论很重要。本文审视并批判了医学中对共情的主流解释。聚焦于使我们能够理解他人的共情成分,有人认为这种理解是通过模拟来实现的。然而,模拟理论并非对医学共情的最佳解释,因为它在理解患者方面存在局限性。针对模拟理论的局限性和反对意见,互动理论作为一种有前景的替代理论被提出。该理论将医生对来自不同背景患者的理解解释为一种学习和应用叙事的能力。通过解释我们如何理解他人,同时又不限制我们理解不同他人的能力,互动理论比模拟理论更有可能提供更好的患者护理,因此是医学领域更好的共情理论。