A medical paradox: curative versus preventive medicine

A familiar medical contrast is presented as part of a modern medical problem. The problem it reflects is the relative importance of preventive and curative services for medical practitioners, which is already, or will shortly resolve itself into, a dilemma of whether medical men should stress preventive medicine to the possible detriment of curative medicine. It is submitted that the solution to both problem and dilemma should be sought against the background of history and philosophy, where they are seen to be expressions of an eternal paradox--that of the relative value of the individual in relation to the family, group, or community. If the submission is valid, then the answer to the problem is not a purely medical exercise, nor is the dilemma purely a 'doctor's dilemma'. The paradox, being eternal, is not soluble in our time, but the community must, on the urging of the medical profession, find a general solution to the problem--'a public consensus for out time'. This must be followed by public demand for a parliamentary solution--'decision-making ex consensus'. It is argued that although the latter programme does not come easily to democracy, it can be achieved through public consensus if action is taken by the leaders of thought in appropriate categories. Initiative must be exercised by the medical profession, but public consensus can only be achieved in consultation with the leaders of all learned professions, civil servants and legislators. It must then be presented fairly and without bias to the public. In the meantime, the medical profession must formulate its own 'medical consensus' and the doctor must resolve his personal dilemma according to formulated law, public or medical consensus or, in the last resort, according to his conviction and conscience. This method of solving a problem will almost certainly be applicable to other and more recent medical problems such as the population explosion, selective abortion and euthanasia.