HF01-01: The “Exhibition of Living Patients”- Hutchinson, Ethics and Urology
Friday, May 3, 2024 1:50 PM to 1:57 PM · 7 min. (US/Central)
206
Abstract
History of Urology Forum
Information
Full Abstract and Figures
Author Block
Shelby E Smith*, Michael E Moran, Columbia, SC
Introduction
Perhaps the greatest single medical conclave of all time occurred in London as the VIIth International Medical Congress which met from August 2 through August 9th, 1881 and included the elite of medicine and surgery throughout the world including Jenner, Pasteur, Lister, Virchow and others. At this medical meeting there was a unique event with the presentation of a museum of living patients, masterminded by Jonathan Hutchinson (1828-1913). Ethical considerations of this event are explored and compared to the present-day urological practices that occur through the lens of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) regarding penalties for identifying patients.
Methods
A review of all aspects of the VIIth International Medical Congress and specifically about the Museum of Living Patients. A literature search including modern day practices, differences, and transgressions that occur in urology regarding non-compliance of the strict laws for protecting patient privacy was performed.
Results
This exhibition included seven patients with leprosy (four supplied by Hutchinson), six patients with myxoedema sat all in a row with “the peculiarities of their features, and the sameness in their peculiarities, became very conspicuous.” There were patients diagnosed with Lupus, that fascinated all who loved esoteric and rare maladies. Recent articles highlight the importance of uniformity in urological practice concerning ethical considerations. Several breaches of patient confidentiality have led to lawsuits and fines highlighting the increased importance placed on protecting patient rights in modern day urology.
Conclusions
The enormous popularity of the Museum parallels the fascination by the medical profession with rarities that continues today in contemporary urology. However, one must be aware of the sanctions regarding patient privacy as previous instances has highlighted the consequences of patient identification in U.S. practices. Another thing to consider is the uniformity of the attitudes between practicing urologists regarding medical ethics and how this impacts teaching and guidelines at academic centers. Although the knowledge that accompanies visualization and discussion of pathology augments education, physicians and students must always reflect upon the ethical duties they have to their patients in terms of confidentiality. “The great duty of each generation is to transfer its knowledge in the fullest and most complete manner to its successor.” Jonathan Hutchinson, 1865
Source Of Funding
None
Author Block
Shelby E Smith*, Michael E Moran, Columbia, SC
Introduction
Perhaps the greatest single medical conclave of all time occurred in London as the VIIth International Medical Congress which met from August 2 through August 9th, 1881 and included the elite of medicine and surgery throughout the world including Jenner, Pasteur, Lister, Virchow and others. At this medical meeting there was a unique event with the presentation of a museum of living patients, masterminded by Jonathan Hutchinson (1828-1913). Ethical considerations of this event are explored and compared to the present-day urological practices that occur through the lens of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) regarding penalties for identifying patients.
Methods
A review of all aspects of the VIIth International Medical Congress and specifically about the Museum of Living Patients. A literature search including modern day practices, differences, and transgressions that occur in urology regarding non-compliance of the strict laws for protecting patient privacy was performed.
Results
This exhibition included seven patients with leprosy (four supplied by Hutchinson), six patients with myxoedema sat all in a row with “the peculiarities of their features, and the sameness in their peculiarities, became very conspicuous.” There were patients diagnosed with Lupus, that fascinated all who loved esoteric and rare maladies. Recent articles highlight the importance of uniformity in urological practice concerning ethical considerations. Several breaches of patient confidentiality have led to lawsuits and fines highlighting the increased importance placed on protecting patient rights in modern day urology.
Conclusions
The enormous popularity of the Museum parallels the fascination by the medical profession with rarities that continues today in contemporary urology. However, one must be aware of the sanctions regarding patient privacy as previous instances has highlighted the consequences of patient identification in U.S. practices. Another thing to consider is the uniformity of the attitudes between practicing urologists regarding medical ethics and how this impacts teaching and guidelines at academic centers. Although the knowledge that accompanies visualization and discussion of pathology augments education, physicians and students must always reflect upon the ethical duties they have to their patients in terms of confidentiality. “The great duty of each generation is to transfer its knowledge in the fullest and most complete manner to its successor.” Jonathan Hutchinson, 1865
Source Of Funding
None
Sessions
History of Urology Forum
206