New masking guidelines are in effect starting April 24.
Vaccines & Boosters | Testing | Visitor Guidelines | Coronavirus
Enter the last name, specialty or keyword for your search below.
Letters
From the Editor
I was halfway through editing “A Living Tribute” (p. 22) when I felt compelled to shut my laptop, walk out into the late summer sun and head to campus to experience the commemorative garden for myself. My thoughts were racing in an endless “to-do” loop and I yearned for a few moments of quiet reflection. The garden, with its tinkling wind chimes and winding labyrinth, didn’t disappoint.
As my mind quieted, I thought how ironic it was that such an idyllic setting had been born out of difficult conversations—conversations that began after medical students here discovered that not all cadavers used in anatomy lab had been voluntarily donated. As it turns out, about a third of the bodies that come from the Maryland Anatomy Board are unclaimed.
“We felt shaken to the core,” project leader Anna Goddu ’19 told writer Linell Smith. “We had adopted this perspective that allowed us to think the dissection was mutual, that we had permission to look into the literal depths of somebody’s body.”
Grappling with the ethical fallout of this discovery, the students came up with a permanent way to honor those anonymous donors, and also to show appreciation for the living—volunteers who helped them learn how to take patient histories and conduct physical exams as part of first-year Clinical Foundations of Medicine.
As impressive as the garden is, the students didn’t stop there. They also developed a 40-minute e-lecture that offers a fascinating look into the history and ethics of cadaver use. I encourage you to check it out in the Videos section on our website.
And the next time you’re in East Baltimore and need a “time out,” stop by the garden (tucked just west of the Armstong Medical Education Building). You’ll be glad you did.
I read with interest the article about resetting the clock for resident hours [Spring/Summer, p. 5]. My question is: Have there been any studies correlating work hours in practice, leisure time, and family time [comparing] older generations with the new generation—in planning for the future? I wonder if [you would find] a difference for cardiovascular events, accidents, alcohol use and divorce between those whose residency hours were “reset” and those whose hours were not?
With regard to “A Noteworthy Endeavor,” [Spring/Summer 2017, by Richard Byrne]: This writer should teach. It is not often these days that one runs across an article that actually covers the basics—who, what, where, when, why and how—early enough that a layman has some understanding of what is going on when the meat of the article is served up.
I enjoyed receiving and reading your Winter 2017 edition. Your magazine has been an essential source of connection to my training days and of reading pleasure for nearly 30 years! For the first time, I feel compelled to write to you in reaction to the front cover and articles, with this issue’s arrival timed just off of my serving as a teaching attending to third-year medical students during their medicine rotation in February.
The front-page marquee, "It’s Personal," caught my attention, particularly in reference to the new clarion call of Hopkins’ so-called precision medicine. Somehow, this juxtaposition of phrases immediately rubbed me the wrong way, not because I don’t applaud the marvelous advancements in medical science, but rather that, ironically, just as the science of medicine has achieved great strides, the truly “personal” aspect of the practice of medicine, of knowing our patients well, which in my view holds the critical key to excellence in medical care, has come increasingly into serious jeopardy.
As a profession, we have allowed the “personal”—both that which promotes valuable insight from learning from a patient’s perspective as well as that which arises from attention to our own inward growth and personal reflection—to wither on the vine. I fear that as we become increasingly puffed up and enamored by our technical prowess, our attention is becoming seriously diverted from that which really makes the practice of medicine truly special for the patient and for the professional alike: formation of a meaningful relationship in the face of the real challenges of caring for the sick. It is through such a relationship that true, fully meaningful, wholly effective healing occurs. And I sensed in my recent teaching rotation that our medical students not only sense this “disconnect” but also are yearning for the skills to achieve this.
I do give you credit for including in the last two pages some due attention to my concern. Ronal Epstein’s book, featured in Mary Catherine Beach’s article [Second Opinion, p. 47], is truly a great read. I encourage physicians to explore this realm of “mindfulness,” especially valuable as growing new demands on our time and attention, particularly from the electronic medical record, pull us farther away from that attention to truly delivering good care. Also, in his piece [Post-Op, p. 48], Dean Rothman gives accurate and important focus and attention to the doctor-patient relationship as the key to turning around the tide of increasing physician “burnout.”
I hope future issues can give further important attention to the humanistic and spiritual-based aspects of medical care, and pray that Hopkins would fully embrace a sincere renewal of the spirit of such Hopkins giants as William Osler back into medical practice. I look forward to continuing to read your wonderful magazine with great interest.Language Assistance Available:
© The Johns Hopkins University, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, and Johns Hopkins Health System. All rights reserved.
