Abstract
In recent years so-called Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) practices have made significant political and professional advances particularly in the United Kingdom (UK): osteopathy and chiropractic were granted statutory self-regulation in the 1990s effectively giving them more professional autonomy and independence than health care professions supplementary to medicine; the practice of acupuncture is widespread within the National Health Service (NHS) for pain control; and homoeopathy is offered to patients by a few General Practitioners alongside conventional treatments. These developments have had a number of consequences: one is that both CAM and Conventional and Orthodox Medical (COM) professions have had to reappraise their professional identity. In manual therapy for example, questions have been asked about the differences between physiotherapy, osteopathy and chiropractic, and what the justification is for having separate professions. A wider question concerns the relationship between CAM and COM; are CAM distinct professions or should they, as has happened to a limited extent in the UK, be absorbed into the broader field of ‘Medicine’ or ‘Health Care’ as adjunctive therapies. CAM professions have also had to develop, implement and enforce codes of practice for practitioners and clarify the scope of practice within a profession. At the heart of these issues lies the need to identify and clarify professional values. A key claim of CAM professions is that their practice is distinct and the outcome of treatment at least as effective and in many cases more effective than with conventional therapies. In addition, what counts as effective outcome is often different from conventional medical understanding, involving more subtle humanitarian considerations, for example. Three values are identified as being commonly held across CAM professions. These are: offering ‘natural’ treatment; being patient rather than disease focussed; and being holistic. However, these may not be as distinctive of CAM as is claimed either because the meaning is unclear or because COM professions claim similar values. The paper argues that the values that inform ‘good practice’ and ‘effective outcome’ should be seen as distinct components of professional competence. This has implications for establishing professional identity and codes of practice.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The division of health care into two or more competing groups can be traced back to ancient times when the Greek school of Aesclaepius, which advocated heroic physician-led treatment, was opposed to the Hygeian school, which was more patient focused and aimed to improve the patient’s capacity to live in harmony with their environment and use internal resources to fight disease. Porter also traces two paths: Rationalists, who were theory-led and Empiricists, who relied on experience. Although rooted in ancient principles, the modern division is based upon practices that were established at the end of the nineteenth Century.
Osteopathy in the USA is significantly different from the UK and rest of the World in that “osteopathic medicine” is equivalent to “conventional medicine”, i.e., American osteopaths have the same legal status as conventional doctors including prescribing rights, performing surgery, obstetrics and so on. In fact, American DOs don’t regard themselves and probably aren’t perceived as CAM practitioners. (Licciardone 2007).
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4009086 Accessed 24th April 2010.
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4025509 Accessed 24th April 2010.
Because CAM covers such a diversity of practices where I refer to CAM I will use it as a plural.
Ironically, homoeopathic remedies prepared with extreme dilution and succussion are far from natural substances, though this is rarely acknowledged.
This is particularly true for osteopathy, chiropractic and physiotherapy where there are questions about whether there is a clear distinction between them or whether there is so much similarity and commonality that they should put aside professional jealousies and be considered as one manual therapy profession. Not surprisingly this meets with resistance and robust defensiveness from the professions.
References
Capra, F. 1975. The tao of physics. Berkeley: Shambhala.
Chua, S.A., and A. Furnham. 2008. Attitudes and beliefs towards complementary and alternative medicine (CAM): A cross-cultural approach comparing Singapore and the United Kingdom. Complementary Therapies in Medicine 16: 247–253.
Corbyn, Z. 2009 Science boost for alternative medicine Bscs Times Higher Education, London Issue 5th February 2009.
Department-of-Health. 2001. Government response to the House of Lords select committee on science and technology’s report on complementary and alternative medicine. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office. Retrieved from http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm51/5124/5124.htm.
Edgar, A. Professional values, aesthetic values, and the ends of trade. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy. This Issue.
Fadlon, J., C.M. Granek, I. Roziner, and M.A. Weingarten. 2008. Familiarity breeds discontent: Senior hospital doctors’ attitudes towards complementary/alternative medicine. Complementary Therapies in Medicine 16: 212–219.
Fulford, K.W.M., G. Stanghellini, and M. Broome. 2004. What can philosophy do for psychiatry? World Psychiatry 3: 130–135.
Greaves, D. 1979. Disease concepts models and classification in western medicine–illustrated by reference to pulmonary tuberculosis and coronary heart disease. Society for the Social History of Medicine Bulletin (24): 31–35.
Greaves, D. 1996. Mystery in western medicine. Aldershot: Avebury.
Joos, S., D.C. Eicher, B. Musselmann, and M. Kadmon. 2008. Development and implementation of a ‘curriculum complementary and alternative medicine’ at the Heidelberg medical school. Forsch Komplementarmed 15: 251–260.
Launer, J. 2002. Narrative-based primary care. Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press.
Licciardone, J.C. 2007. Osteopathic research: Elephants, enigmas, and evidence. Osteopathic Medicine and Primary Care. BioMed Central, BioMed Central.
Lindlahr, H. 1975. Philosophy of natural therapeutics revised. Saffron Walden: The C. W. Daniel Company Ltd.
Mcmullin, E. 1995. Underdetermination. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20: 233–252.
Porter, R. 1989. Health for sale: Quackery in England 1660–1850. Manchester & New York: Manchester University Press.
Sadler, J.Z. 1997. Recognizing values: A descriptive-causal method for medical/scientific discourses. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 22: 541–565.
Schaffner, K.F. 2002. Assessments of efficacy in biomedicine: The turn toward methodological pluralism. In The role of complementary & alternative medicine, ed. D. Callahan. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Sellman, D. 2010. Professional values and nursing. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy. doi:10.1007/s11019-010-9295-7.
Sewitch, M.J., M. Cepoiu, N. Rigillo, and D. Sproule. 2008. A literature review of health care professional attitudes toward complementary and alternative medicine. Complementary Health Practice Review 13: 139–154.
Thomas, K., and P. Coleman. 2004. Use of complementary or alternative medicine in a general population in great Britain. Results from the national omnibus survey. Journal of Public Health 26: 152–157.
Thomas, K., J.P. Nicholl, and P. Coleman. 2001. Use and expenditure on complementary medicine: A population based survey. Complementary Therapies in Medicine 9: 2–11.
Tyreman, S.J. 2000. Promoting critical thinking in health care: Phronesis and criticality. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 3: 117–124.
Tyreman, S.J. 2008. Valuing osteopathy: What are (professional) values and how do we teach them? International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine 11: 90–95.
Wolpe, P.R. 2002. Medical culture and cam culture: Science and ritual in the academic medical center. In The role of complementary and alternative medicine: Accommodating pluralism, ed. D. Callahan. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tyreman, S. Values in complementary and alternative medicine. Med Health Care and Philos 14, 209–217 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-010-9297-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-010-9297-5