Ava Oyen Sherry Lind English 120 8 April 2024 Thin-Slicing Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking by Malcolm Gladwell is all about the decisions we make without putting conscious thought towards them. In the first chapter of Blink, Gladwell teaches about thin-slicing. Thin-slicing is “the ability of our unconscious to find patterns in situations and behavior based on very narrow slices of experience” (Gladwell 23). There are many examples of this throughout the book, but one that stuck out to me is about a doctor’s tone of voice. In section five of chapter one, Gladwell tells of some studies of surgeons who were sued versus those who were not. The studies showed that doctors who spent more time with their patients and showed that they …show more content…
That is the main reason doctors get sued because “people just don't sue doctors they like” (Gladwell, 40). Many surgeons make mistakes, but it is the ones who use a dominant tone of voice and make people feel less than that that end up with lawsuits. It makes sense to me that doctors are sued mainly based on how they treat people. I think that the methods used are a powerful example of why what you say and how you say it matters. It can make a big difference in your life and other people’s. I feel that the methods are effective because they prove just how much people use thin-slicing. You can decide whether or not you trust someone after talking to them for just a few minutes and you can get a good read on their personality. The experiments reminded me of times where people have talked down to me and made me feel less than. After those instances, I’ve instantly been turned off to getting to know those people more. I was reminded of this because of the tone of voice used and how people talked to me. Overall, the methods used in Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking by Malcolm Gladwell show how thin-slicing works and different situations where it is
The writing style of the author is quite interesting to me. Atul Gawande’s honesty, a major aspect of his writing style, beautifully highlights the good and bad of any medical profession. For example, Gawande’s argument over the use of patients for resident training
In the text, Gawande states, “I punctured a patient’s lung, for example-the right lung of a chief of surgery from another hospital, no less-and given the odds, I’m sure such things will happen again.” This shows how fatal errors can occur during a surgical procedure however, it is something that surgical residents have to grow accustomed to since mistakes like this are likely to reoccur. Gawande also mentions that when practicing on a patient, mistakes are bound to happen however, it is a part of learning. In the text, Gawande states, “She let me continue with the next steps, which I bumbled through. I didn’t realize how long and floppy the guide wire was until I pulled the coil of its plastic sleeve, and, putting one end of it into the patient, I very nearly contaminated the other.” This quote proves that although mistakes can happen, it is a part of the learning process. In this specific part, Gawande talks about how he nearly made a severe error however, he was able to learn from his mistake and complete the procedure successfully. This shows how practicing on patients is necessary for the advancement of the medical field. Therefore, although ethical and practical tensions may arise, practicing on patients is needed in order to save the lives of many in the long
People trust doctors to save lives. Everyday millions of Americans swallow pills prescribed by doctors to alleviate painful symptoms of conditions they may have. Others entrust their lives to doctors, with full trust that the doctors have the patient’s best interests in mind. In cases such as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, the Crownsville Hospital of the Negro Insane, and Joseph Mengele’s Research, doctors did not take care of the patients but instead focused on their self-interest. Rebecca Skloot, in her contemporary nonfiction novel The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, uses logos to reveal corruption in the medical field in order to protect individuals in the future.
In her personal essay, Dr. Grant writes that she learned that most cases involving her patients should not be only handled from a doctor’s point of view but also from personal experience that can help her relate to each patient regardless of their background; Dr. Grant was taught this lesson when she came face to face with a unique patient. Throughout her essay, Dr. Grant writes about how she came to contact with a patient she had nicknamed Mr. G. According to Dr. Grant, “Mr. G is the personification of the irate, belligerent patient that you always dread dealing with because he is usually implacable” (181). It is evident that Dr. Grant lets her position as a doctor greatly impact her judgement placed on her patients, this is supported as she nicknamed the current patient Mr.G . To deal with Mr. G, Dr. Grant resorts to using all the skills she
Sarah Cullen and Margaret Klein, “Respect for Patients, Physicians, and the Truth,” in L. Vaughn, Bioethics: 148-55
Respect for Subjects, as defined by the U.S government, is to “show respect to human subjects, researchers must continue to check the well-being of each subject as the study proceeds. Researchers should remove subjects from the study if it becomes too risky or harmful.” (Emanuel et al. p.7, ¶7-8). The means that the doctors must keep checking on the subjects and must be removed if it was dangerous. Charlie wasn’t removed from the experiment even though it becomes harmful to him. This is why the study violates the principle of Respect for Subjects, as it doesn’t benefit Charlie, making this experiment treacherous. “I have already begun to notice signs of emotional instability and forgetfulness, the first symptoms of the burnout.” (Keyes June 5, ¶8). Charlie is struggling and is getting worse by the day, and Dr. Strauss and Nemur are not taking any action into it. At the same time, these doctors are still keeping Charlie in the experiment even though he is at discomfort. Later on in the passage, Charlie is at distress. “Deterioration progressing. I have become absentminded.” (Keyes June 10, ¶1). Charlie symptoms are getting worse progressively just because he recieved the experiment. He is returning back to his original state. In the story, Fair Subject Selection was clearly not applied to the experiment as is didn’t follow the regulation. The main reason why this
When a person seeks medical attention they go with the hope that their personal rights will not be violated with the belief that doctors will uphold their personal standards. Unfortunately, this is not always so for people who visit the hospital. There are documented cases in United States history involving African Americans being experimented on for the greater good without their knowledge or consent, and some of the most heinous cases involve doctors injecting their study groups with life threatening diseases. What happens when good science goes bad and who has the right to relegate the status of another human being as less than? In this research paper we will examine a clinical testing case study featuring the violation and exploitation
Upon analyzing his experiment, Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, concludes that people will drive to great lengths to obey orders given by a higher authority. The experiment, which included ordinary people delivering “shocks” to an unknown subject, has raised many questions in the psychological world. Diana Baumrind, a psychologist at the University of California and one of Milgram’s colleagues, attacks Milgram’s ethics after he completes his experiment in her review. She deems Milgram as being unethical towards the subjects he uses for testing and claims that his experiment is irrelevant to obedience. In contrast, Ian Parker, a writer for New Yorker and Human Sciences, asserts Milgram’s experiments hold validity in the psychological world. While Baumrind focuses on Milgram’s ethics, Parker concentrates more on the reactions, both immediate and long-term, to his experiments.
Diligence is a virtue. This is a theme Atul Gawande presents to the reader throughout Better: A Surgeon’s Notes on Performance. In each story, Gawande provides insight on medical studies he has previously embarked upon. For example, in “The Mop-up” the author tells us about a time when he went to India to observe the efforts to eradicate polio. Gawande explains how he followed a supervisor around and how vaccinations were performed. Additionally, in another chapter he debates on whether physicians should take part in death sentences. Throughout his adventures Gawande provides numerous enriching personal accounts of controversial events and what it is like to be a doctor; each with diligence playing a key part.
In “Should Doctors Tell the Truth?” Joseph Collins argues for paternalistic deception, declaring that it is permissible for physicians to deceive their patients when it is in their best interests. Collins considers his argument from a “pragmatic” standpoint, rather than a moral one, and uses his experience with the sick to justify paternalistic deception. Collins argues that in his years of practicing, he has encountered four types of patients who want to know the truth: those that want to know so they know how much time they have left, those who do not want to know and may suffer if told the truth, those who are incapable of hearing the truth, and those who do not have a serious diagnosis (605). Collins follows with the assertion that the more serious the condition is, the less likely the patient is to seek information about their health (606).
As the story begins, the unnamed doctor is introduced as one who appears to be strictly professional. “Aas often, in such cases, they weren’t telling me more than they had to, it was up to me to tell them; that’s why they were spending three dollars on me.” (par. 3) The doctor leaves the first impression that he is one that keeps his attention about the job and nothing out of the ordinary besides stating his impressions on the mother, father and the patient, Mathilda. Though he does manage to note that Mathilda has a fever. The doctor takes what he considers a “trial shot” and “point of departure” by inquiring what he suspects is a sore throat (par. 6). This point in the story, nothing remains out of the ordinary or questionable about the doctor’s methods, until the story further develops.
James’ hindered attempts to empathize with his patients because of the inexpressibility of pain underscores the importance of effective communication and empathy while alleviating the suffering of others. Ivan’s begging for understanding from others who aren’t listening shows advocates for treating others with empathy and compassion who are experiencing illness. There are notable differences between the novels alongside the similarities. Ian Williams primarily focuses on medical professionals’ experiences, highlighting the challenges they face in diagnosing and treating pain in “The Bad Doctor.” Dr. James’ struggle with his work stems from the limitations of medical knowledge and language in addressing pain.
In these cases, it is argued that it is morally permissible for a physician to deceive a patient. The medical professional violates the patient's autonomy so he can regain his health. According to Cullen and Klein, “It is easy to overestimate the extent to which lying to a patient will be useful in helping him regan his health” (160). There is lack of data for their claim that it is easy to overestimate the actual benefit of deception in the patient’s regaining of his or her health. Serious medical conditions require the patient’s full attention to and participation in a proper treatment regimen.
A clear example of this is when the doctor explains to the client, what is going to happen to him if he were to move, his tone of voice is stern and assertive. Demonstrating the seriousness of the consequences, this is an effective use of therapeutic communication, because the client appears to momentarily understand. His’s tone of voice becomes soft and there is no aggressiveness to his pitch (Arnold, 2016). Two factors that may have contributed to conflict throughout this clip is miscommunication and intoxication.
A group of doctors must work against time in an effort to come up with a life-saving decision. Our focus will revolve around the variety of verbal and nonverbal tactics Dr.