Part 1!

Benedict gives Obama some life lessons -- literally!

The above link is a good place to start with Religion in Medicine. What does it mean? Who does this concern? Why is it important to tackle such a personal topic?
Pope Benedict simply lets the President know his opinion on where he is allowing the science/medicine to venture. Most of the article is irrelevant but I was fascinated that this was a topic under religion in Bioethics.
So, I began to think about what kind of professional I want to be described as? How much of that description is directly related to my faith? The link simply reminded me of how important it is to at least be aware of the religiosity in such a influential field.

So my first objective is to explain the regulations and code of ethics pertaining to Faith/Religion in Medicine. Then, I want to address two sides of how religion affects Medicine, from the patient and from the professional. This blog is dedicated to providing the reasoning behind why it is so important to be aware (religious or not) of the role religion/faith plays in medicine.

Modern medicine raises an anomaly of grey area. Should we or not lengthen life through artificial means?Is it acceptable to shorten life or dull the exposure of life through the use of pain medications? What is the expanse on how far a person can go to render a disease? This is but a fraction of the myriad of questions that have religious and spiritual significance to a large host of our society. These decisions deserve a sensitive yet direct approach. How can one's faith be taken into account if it is not acknowledged? And at what point does a professional know that faith is playing a role in the patients decision?

Below I have included the guidelines a medical professional must abide by when dealing with the religious aspect of their duty.

Four guidelines are offered for physicians regarding religious issues:

• physicians may enter such a dialogue, but they are not obligated to do so.
• the dialogue must be at the invitation of the patient, not imposed by the physician.
• physicians must be open and nonjudgmental in claiming that their beliefs are personally helpful, without claiming ultimate truth
• the guiding principle should be "do no harm," the purpose of the dialogue should be burden-lifting, not burden-producing. [1]

So for now, I leave you with this question: How can a professional assess when faith is pertinent to the patient if they are not allowed to bring it up? Or course, as you may assume, their are guidelines for that as well! 

 1. Foster DW. Religion and Medicine: The Physician's Perspective. Health/Medicine and the Faith Traditions. Marty, M.E., Vaux, K.L., editors, Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1982, pp. 245-270.