Collective Actions by Physicians that Do Not Endanger Patients

Abstract

This paper aims to identify some of the values held by physicians in the United States that are relevant to physician strikes and other collective actions, and to articulate a position about collective actions that is consistent with medical professionalism. The concept of medical professionalism includes several elements to which physicians should aspire, but the fundamental definition of professionalism is based on just one of these elements, the virtue of altruism. As stated by a committee project paper of the American Board of Internal Medicine, “professionalism in medicine requires the physician to serve the interests of the patient above his or her self-interest.”

Medical Doctors’ Strike: An Ethical Overview with Reference to the Indian Context

“…In addition to these, recent debates and literature on doctors' strike give more emphasize to trust-relationship, non-maleficence, autonomy, and professionalism etc. [23,[38][39][40][41][42]. There are ongoing discussions and debates regarding the ethical justification of doctor's strike around the world.…”

“…In theory, a doctors' profession differs from other workers in that their primary goals are not making money but of saving the lives of patients with whom they have a fiduciary commitment. Therefore physicians should serve the interests of their patients according to their professional commitments above and beyond their own personal and immediate interests [39]. Jackson opined that in the event of a physicians' strike for personal financial gain, even if it were possible to delude patients that such a strike was really for 'their own good' , the action would go against the collective conscience of the profession [38].…”

Strikes by Physicians: A Historical Perspective toward an Ethical Evaluation

“…While most strikes of attending physicians would be difficult to justify ethically, strikes by residents and interns may be easier to justify because of the opportunities for their exploitation by the attending staff and administration of a health care organization. In addition, residents and interns rarely have the ultimate authority over their patients, as they are supervised by attending physicians who can often cover the essential services during a strike (69). Kravitz and Linn found that most house staff in their study considered a strike justified "when the situation constituted a significant threat to future patients (as with equipment shortages) and the risk to current patients is low" (70).…”