The Hippocratic Oath and its Ability to Evolve

The Classical and Modern versions of the Hippocratic Oath are one in the same. Although the two oaths have varying clauses, the overall composure of the modern vow seems to stay true to its predecessor. The theme that is most prevalent throughout both pieces is that medical science is a sort of “art” that demands respect. The classical version of the oath differs greatly in its desire to keep the “art” of medicine among a sort of priesthood. The two oaths also differ in the fact that sympathy towards the patient in the modern version is highly valued; whereas the classical version only mentions the caretaker will stay away from abortion, euthanasia, and sexual relations with patients. In order to reflect the historical and cultural values that we posses in modern society, the recent versions of the oath have been written in a manner accepting of the technological advances we have come to witness in our society. Medicine when looked at as a form of Art requires a sympathetic touch that we see through a priesthood of doctors sticking together, holding true to their oath. Many forms of Art are only successfully composed with a sympathetic touch, such as medicine. In this sense, a priesthood takes on the responsibility of an artist, painting a sympathetic canvas of guidelines that must be followed. I “will guard my life and my art,” the classical oath proclaims. “There is art to medicine and science,” claims the modern version of the oath. Hippocrates was the first to proclaim this science as a sort of “art.” Although Hippocrates‟ true translation may constitute “techne” as a “skill,” this definition could easily relate a skilled practitioner, to a skilled “Artist.” In the humanities, we try to “reflect upon our lives and ask fundamental questions of value, purpose, and meaning in a rigorous and systematic way” (mfh.org). When realizing that individuals from the past considered medicine a sort of “art,” I decided to reflect upon my own life experiences with doctors in the past, in hopes of linking our definition of “What is Art?” into this question. Although my definition of art, in my piece about “What is Art?,” led me to conclude that art is what one conceives it to be, with the ability to use life-experiences and personal interactions in order to create or classify art. Doctors are introduced to various patient problems and
experiences throughout their life, providing the ability to make educated opinions, “painting” their medical prognosis of their patient. In Ancient Greek society, an oath is defined as “A promise or a statement of fact calling upon something or someone that the oath maker considers sacred... as a witness to the binding nature of the promise or the truth…” (Wikipedia.com) The Hippocratic Oath, both modern and classical, follows the rules of a typical oath. The original “doctors” of the time seemed to create somewhat of a priesthood, in which the oath-taker promises to “[instruct] my sons and [the] sons of him who [have] instructed me and to the pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.” (Hippo. Oath – Classical Version) A priesthood is defined as the “clergy [who perform] ritual[„s] within the sphere of the sacred or numinous, communicating with the gods on behalf of the community.” (Wikipedia.com) Clergy members were known for their ability to conduct ritual aspects of the religious life such as the teaching or spreading of the religion‟s doctrine. They were also known for dealing with life events such as childbirth etc. The classical oath is definitely reminiscent of these values and duties. The individual who would profess this oath swore to the Greek Gods, proclaiming that they would allow themselves to stick with the rituals of the past by allowing the gods to be witness, by “communicating with the gods on behalf of the community,” just as the clergy. (Wikipedia.com) However, the modern version of the oath seems to open its gates to everyone, promising to uphold the oath through personal ability and judgment. The modern oath calls for the sharing of “such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.” The restriction of teaching this “art” to new members of the science cannot be seen in the modern version of the oath. As time advanced, all members of society were granted the possibility of learning the “art”. It seems as if as time and technology advanced, individuals became more in-tune, changing the oath to reflect social and cultural standards. Art was a skill developed in the West and originally dealt with the High Renaissance. Like medicine, Art was originally a defining standard only practiced by a certain group of individuals who related to a higher society. Art was heavily criticized and like medicine, it had rough beginnings.
The fact now recognized in modern medical practice that sympathy towards a patient plays a large role in the well-being of an individual, can be seen in the modern version of the oath. As we discussed in class, only recently has the sympathetic approach to a patient proven that sympathy and understanding provides the patient with a sense of acceptance and understanding. Personally, in my own past visits to doctor‟s offices, I have noticed the difference that sympathy plays in the ability for the patient to feel secure. I have undergone only two surgeries in my life, neither being an extreme operation. When removing my tonsils, I felt that because the doctor was unsympathetic towards my pre-operatal needs, I was more unprepared for the surgery than I could have been if my doctor WAS sympathetic. Previous surgeries have proved to me that a doctor, sympathetic in his art is most successful. Lasagna‟s modern version of the oath makes sure to make evident to the oath-taker that they are “not treat[ing] a fever chart,” but “a sick human being.” The realization that sympathy plays such a large role in the treatment of patients is definitely a modern advancement that was discovered throughout the ages of health-care. Today‟s society is a witness to our amazing technological and medical advances throughout time. The Hippocratic Oath, whether modern or classical, is one in the same when it comes to the basic clauses. Advances in medical technology as well as changes in societal values HAVE changed certain aspects and clauses originally included in the classical, original version. However, these changes conformed to the more sympathetically driven values that are common in today‟s society. The modern and classical versions of the oath are easily comparable, showing that medicine is the culmination of one‟s desire to create an Art, sympathetically necessary to the life of a human being. I believe that the meanings behind the oath‟s are closely comparable due to the fact that they resemble a form of covenant, overall, both promise to uphold truth and justice while providing care for those in need.