Written in the 5th century BC, the Hippocratic Oath has been described as the first serious attempt to bring together philosophy, ethics and therapy in an integrated system of medical practice (Reference Zilboorg and HenryZilboorg & Henry, 1941). Hippocratic ethics influence many contemporary medical oaths and ethicists (Reference Roddy and JonesRoddy & Jones, 2002), but although it is seen as an inspirational statement of the ethos of medicine by some, the relevance of the Hippocratic Oath to modern clinical practice continues to be questioned (Reference LoeflerLoefler, 2002). Very little is known, however, about psychiatrists’ attitudes to the Hippocratic Oath and whether they consider it still possible to practise medicine according to the Oath. The aim of this study was to ask how far psychiatrists believed that their practice reflected the principles of the Hippocratic Oath.

Method

A survey was conducted in February 2004 of psychiatrists working at the Caludon Centre, an 80-bed mental health in-patient unit in Coventry. An anonymised questionnaire was constructed consisting of 15 statements or closed questions restating the original Oath (British Medical Association, 2004) using a simple Likert scale to measure agreement with each statement (available from the authors on request). We added one ‘ summary’ question which asked whether it was still possible to practise medicine according to the Oath. Every doctor in the unit was personally approached by the authors and asked to participate. Results were collated and analysed with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 12 for Windows.

Results

Of the 44 psychiatrists at the Caludon Centre, 40 (91%) completed the questionnaire; 17 were consultants and 23 were junior doctors. Their age ranged from 27 to 74 years (mean 34 years); 32 (80%) were male and 8 (20%) female.

The main results of the survey are summarised in Tables 1 and 2. There was no statistically significant difference between the response of consultants and junior doctors for any of the statements. A substantial majority of respondents believed that medicine should be practised according to the Hippocratic Oath; unconditional agreement with individual statements varied from 22 to 100%.

Table 1.

Agreement with statements concerning the Hippocratic Oath for 40 psychiatrists¹

	Agreement
Statement	Always n (%)	Frequently n (%)	Rarely n (%)	Never n (%)
I show my teachers unconditional respect	21 (54)	17 (43)	1 (3)	0 (0)
I help my teachers in professional matters, if required	17 (46)	15 (41)	5 (13)	0 (0)
I help my teachers in other matters	8 (22)	23 (62)	6 (16)	0 (0)
I treat other doctors as my brothers	10 (26)	21 (55)	6 (16)	1 (3)
I have my patient’s health as my first consideration	33 (83)	7 (17)	0 (0)	0 (0)
I avoid harming my patients	37 (92)	3 (8)	0 (0)	0 (0)
I am against the use of medical knowledge to end the life of my patients	30 (77)	7 (18)	1 (3)	1 (3)
I am against the termination of pregnancy in my patients	9 (25)	12 (33)	6 (17)	9 (25)
I practise my profession with conscience and dignity	33 (83)	7 (17)	0 (0)	0 (0)
I undertake clinical interventions only within my professional competence	31 (77)	9 (23)	0 (0)	0 (0)
I abstain from any mischief and corruption towards my patients	39 (98)	1 (2)	0 (0)	0 (0)
I avoid any sexual relations with my patients	39 (100)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)
I hold the information about my patients in confidentiality	30 (75)	10 (25)	0 (0)	0 (0)

Table 2.

Responses to closed questions of 40 psychiatrists

	Response
Closed question	Yes n (%)	No n (%)
I impart my medical knowledge only to those who follow medical ethics and obey medical law1	15 (42)	21 (58)
I believe that medicine should be practised according to the Hippocratic Oath	33 (83)	7 (17)

The first four statements specify the duties of a medical trainee towards his teachers and other doctors. An overwhelming majority (97%) of medical staff at the Caludon Centre said they respected their teachers. Most were still willing to provide help in both professional (86%) and other matters (64%). The tradition of solidarity among doctors also appears to remain strong, with 81% of respondents claiming always or frequently to treat other doctors as brothers. There was greater ambiguity about the transmission of medical knowledge: 58% of doctors supported the dissemination of medical knowledge to those who do not follow medical ethics and obey medical law.

The next part of the Oath summarises the values and principles underpinning medical practice: treatment according to the patient’s best interests (beneficence), avoiding harm (non-malfeasance), prohibition of abortion and assisted death and practising within one’s competence and with a high degree of personal integrity. The results show strong support for the principles of beneficence and non-malfeasance: 83% of respondents claimed to always have their patients’ health as their first consideration, 17% only frequently; 92% declared that they always avoid harming their patients, with 8% acknowledging that it has not always been possible; 77% were against the use of medical knowledge to end a patient’s life in any circumstances; 18% were prepared to consider some exceptions and 6% were rarely or never against euthanasia. The statement prohibiting the use of abortion produced the most ambiguous response: 25% of doctors were always against and 25% were never against termination of pregnancy by their patients. The rest remained ambivalent -33% of psychiatrists reject abortion frequently, a further 17% rarely. The question on termination of pregnancy also had the highest non-completion rate, with some 10% of respondents choosing not to answer the question.

The last part of the Oath deals with maintaining the integrity of the therapeutic relationship. All of the respondents in our survey agreed with this principle: 83% declared that they always practised their profession with conscience and dignity; the other 17% did so frequently; 98% of psychiatrists condemned corruption and 100% were against sexual relationships with patients; 77% stated that they undertake interventions only within their competence, with 23% of respondents admitting that they had dealt with situations beyond their clinical expertise. Maintaining confidentiality in psychiatry is sometimes problematic. A quarter of psychiatrists acknowledged that it was not always possible to hold information about their patients in complete confidentiality.

Discussion

Only one respondent (2.5%) indicated that they supported all the statements derived from the Oath and the level of support for the other statements varied. Statements prohibiting the abuse of the therapeutic relationship and those supporting the Hippocratic principles of beneficence and non-malfeasance attracted almost unanimous support. However, errant behaviour may not have been declared for fear of professional censure. Moreover, respondents were presented with a restatement of the Oath rather than the original. One principle, the prohibition of sharing medical knowledge with others, was rejected by a small majority (58%) of respondents. The most equivocal responses concerned statements about treating doctors as brothers (only 26% always agreed), forbidding abortion (25% never agreed with this) and helping teachers in non-professional matters (22% always agreed). Despite these ambiguities, our survey suggests that the majority of psychiatrists believe that medicine should be practised according to the principles of the Hippocratic Oath. However, because of the small sample size the results may not reflect the view of all UK psychiatrists.

In the past 25 years most of the major innovations in medical ethics have come from outside the Hippocratic tradition, notably from law, politics and economics. The role of traditional medical ethics in contemporary medicine is unclear, although personal integrity, trust and acknowledging tradition have been identified as key components of postmodern psychiatric ethics (Reference Dyer, Bloch, Chodoff and GreenDyer, 1999). Bioethics has been criticised for failing to recognise how far medicine is a value-based as well as an evidence-based discipline (Reference FulfordFulford, 1993). We believe the level of support shown in our survey for the principles of the Oath supports the notion that moral values are still felt to be important to contemporary psychiatric practice. According to Jaspers, tradition is the memory of the profession (Reference JaspersJaspers, 1963) and this needs to be safeguarded in the light of the multiple and changing demands of society on medicine. These demands can be creative, helping to redefine the role of the profession in a postmodern world. Such a redefinition, however, should also be informed by traditional values and beliefs. These values can make us aware of our history and identity and provide guidance in a time of change. Articulated in a contemporary form, Hippocratic values such as avoiding harm, acting in the best interest of the patient, compassion, integrity, honesty and respect for human life maintain their relevance and prove that goodness in medical practice does remain continuous across the ages.