OBJECTIVES This article explores the concept of resilience and its potential relevance to medicine. It also looks at the dimensions of resilience and its ethical importance for effective professional practice, and considers whether a focus on resilience might be useful in medical training.METHODS An applied literature search was conducted across the domains of education, ethics, psychology and sociology to answer the research question: 'What is resilience and what might it mean for professional development in medical education?' This article predominantly considers the findings in relation to training in undergraduate and postgraduate settings, although the literature is wide-ranging and findings may be applicable elsewhere.RESULTS Resilience is a dynamic capability which can allow people to thrive on challenges given appropriate social and personal contexts. The dimensions of resilience (which include self-efficacy, self-control, ability to engage support and help, learning from difficulties, and persistence despite blocks to progress) are all recognised as qualities that are important in clinical leaders. Much of what is deemed good practice in modern pedagogical approaches to medical training may support the development of resilience in adulthood, but this concept has rarely been used as a goal of professional development. More research is needed on the ways in which resilience can be recognised, developed and supported during and after clinical training.

Empathy is commonly regarded as an essential attribute for doctors and there is a conviction that empathy must be taught to medical students. Yet it is not clear exactly what empathy is, from a philosophical or sociological point of view, or whether it can be taught. The meaning, role and relevance of empathy in medical education have tended to be unquestioningly assumed; there is a need to examine and contextualise these assumptions. This paper opens up that debate, arguing that 'empathy', as it is commonly understood, is neither necessary nor sufficient to guarantee good medical or ethical practice.

Making treatment decisions for older people is difficult, because of the complex interplay of their multiple co-morbidities, but also because of the fine balance of risks vs. benefit in any chosen management plan. This becomes even more difficult when they lose the capacity to tell us what they want, and often in such situations we have to rely on information from others in order to make decisions based on their best interests. Advance care planning should help with making these decisions clearer, based on the documented preferences of what the patient would have wanted while capacity was still present. However, such documents are still very rarely used, and even if they are, health-care professionals are often wary of them for the multitude of ethical and legal problems that can arise.