Abstract

The purpose of this research, led in the wake of years of pressure to reject paternalism, was to study whether controlled practice of nonverbal communication by doctors inheres a continued risk of paternalistic attitudes in oncology clinic interviews (chosen to illustrate the doctor–patient relationship). this study involved qualitative descriptive research based on interview observations and questionnaires and mobilized recognized theory borrowed from sociology and anthropology. We found that the legislative framework governing the doctor–patient relationship has simply shifted the paternalism issue from verbal communication over to a new area that doctors have not yet mastered and patients have not yet understood, i.e. nonverbal communication. this study shows that all the laws framing the doctor–patient relationship can be circumvented, and that by controlling nonverbal communication, the doctor can fall back into paternalism. the rejection of paternalism therefore needs to lead to an appropriate reading of the patient’s story, which in ethical terms can only happen if hospital structures are made non-paternalizing by design, if doctors learn to understand the patient’s different chronemic timeframe, and if doctors committedly engage in the hippocratic Oath codified through the ethics of care.

Keywords:

Physician patient relationship, cancer, Paternalism, clinical ethics, communication, Medical practices, Patient information.