If you’re selling the ride like a used car salesman, you’re using this as a trick. That’s unaccptable. The difference may be subtle, but it’s real.

When time is of the essence and ive educated the patient as much as a lay person can be educated lying on the floor – I do like just about any tool that allows me to convey my concerns at a level the patient / family can quickly and absolutely understand and relate too – especially a tool that has a lot of plain English. Symptoms are something we understand, loss of loved one is something everyone understands.

In this sense I see a positive “technique” that could save someones life. If you look at it as a “trick” then thats what it is to you and its probably not a good idea… Semantics?

I agree that there is nothing medically inappropriate about doing this. It doesn’t outright violate any tenant of medical ethics that I’m familiar with. But I could see it being abused to get people to go to the hospital who don’t really need to go.

I’m not familiar with your third and fourth pillar comment. It sounds like you might be talking about the governing pillars of the European Union and I don’t know enough about those legal tenants to speak on them.

As with any powerful tool, it could be used appropriately for the benefit of the patient and it could be used inappropriatly as well. We have to assume that it’s being used by ethical providers in the patients best interest. (Like everything else we do.)

Having said that, I’m still not 100% convinced that I should have shared it. Like medicine, sometimes we proceed in uncertainty.

I agree that the connection is essential. This won’t work if you haven’t established a solid connection.

With the marriage comment, I was referring to the phrase in quotes ““I’m married too and I imagine that you love your wife every bit as much as I love mine.” I was emphasizing that you’d only tell the patient that you were married if you really were.

I don’t advocate ever lying to the patient or trying to pretend that you’re someone whom you are not. I’ve spoken in the past on the importance of being authentic in your interactions with a patient. If you’re not, they will sense it. Tell the truth.

Thanks for the question.

Understanding the risks means really understanding. And we hope that, for the rational individual, that’s enough.

Whilst I do see the merits of this technique, and its importance in some situations, I do have to question whether it’s actually ethically sound? If you go down the beneficience & non-malevolance (primum non nocere) side of things, then you’re covered, but I do wonder whether this conflicts with the 3rd and 4th pillars, justice, and most obviously, patient autonomy. Could this not be seen by some as manipulation?

I’m not saying which way I lie, purely because I don’t know. I’d be interested to hear everyone’s thoughts.