Modern Medical Science and the Divine Providence of God": Rethinking the Place of Religion in Postwar U.S. Medical History (original) (raw)
Related papers
Modern Medical Science and the Divine Province of God
Drawing on a large cache of letters to John and Frances Gunther after the death of their son as well as memoirs and fiction by bereaved parents, this essay challenges the assumptions of secularization that infuse histories of twentieth-century American medicine. Many parents who experienced the death of children during the postwar period relied heavily on religion to help make sense of the tragedies medicine could not prevent. Parental accounts included expression of belief in divine intervention and the power of prayer, gratitude for God's role in minimizing suffering, confidence in the existence of an afterlife, and acceptance of the will of God. Historians seeking to understand how parents and families understood both the delivery of medical care and the cultural authority of medical science must integrate an understanding of religious experiences and faith into their work.
Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 2014
The history commonly told of the relationship between modern medicine and religion is one of steady, even inevitable, separation rooted in the Enlightenment. The divorce between medicine and religion, it is thought, had become nearly total before a recent surge of interest in the spiritual and religious dimensions of health care. This narrative, however, misjudges a persistent sense of spiritual need in illness that medical practice, even today, is unable to entirely ignore. Relying on primary sources, we recount here the little known story of the rise and fall of the Committee on Medicine and Religion and the Department of Medicine and Religion at the American Medical Association between 1961 and 1974. Arising in a context of a widely perceived dehumanization of care and the emergence of new ethical dilemmas at the bedside—concerns with significant parallels today—the initiative garnered striking physician enthusiasm and achieved dramatic successes nationally before coming to a puzzling end in 1972. We argue that its demise was linked to the AMA’s contentious internal debate on abortion, and conclude with a note of caution regarding the status of normative concerns in medicine’s ongoing efforts to address the spiritual and religious dimensions of its practices.
Social Problems, 2009
We investigate how 30 pediatricians and pediatric oncologists who practice and teach at elite medical centers determine whether religion and spirituality are relevant to what Andrew Abbot (1988) calls their professional "jurisdictions." Through in-depth interviews we focus on their everyday interactions with patients and families. We ask: (1) How do they gather information about religion and spirituality and determine when that information is relevant to their professional work? (2) Do they perceive religion and spirituality to be a barrier or a bridge to medical care as they do what Thomas calls "boundary work"? We find that pediatric oncologists more than pediatricians see religion and spirituality as relevant to their professional work, though still largely outside their professional jurisdiction. It is most relevant when families are making medical decisions and in end of life situations. Physicians tend to view religion and spirituality functionally, describing impermeable boundaries in medical decision making situations and more permeable boundaries at the end of life. Physicians view religion and spirituality as a barrier when it impedes medical recommendations and as a bridge when it helps families answer questions medicine inherently cannot. Such findings have implications for a wide range of professionals as they negotiate their jurisdictions, particularly around religion and spirituality, in everyday practice.
Bioethics without God: The Transformation of Medicine within a Fully Secular Culture
Christian bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality
Medicine is always set within particular cultural contexts and human interests. Central aspects of medical practice, such as concepts of health and disease, bioethical judgments, as well as the framing of healthcare policy, always intersect with an overlapping set of culturally situated communities (scientific, moral, religious, and political), each striving to understand as well as to manipulate the world in ways that each finds socially desirable, morally appropriate, aesthetically pleasing, politically useful, or otherwise fitting. Such taken-for-granted background conditions, in turn, impact clinical expectations, understandings of scientific findings, and appreciation of bioethical obligations. As background norms shift, so too do diagnostic categories as alternative modes of classification and treatment prove more useful for achieving socially, culturally, or politically desired outcomes. It is on this point that the essays in this number of Christian Bioethics strike an important chord. As the authors demonstrate, the most fundamental disagreements in bioethics turn on those who seek to frame culture and moral choice around the recognition of God's existence and those committed to recasting all of our social, moral, scientific, and cultural institutions in terms of a foundational atheism. In various ways, each paper illustrates that without canonical grounding in a fully transcendent God, morality-and epistemic claims more generally-are demoralized, deflated, and brought into question. From the religious practices that guide the provision of Catholic health care and the underlying social norms governing psychiatric medical diagnosis, to whether God should be subject to scientific measurement, and the supposed existence of a "common morality," the essays in this number of Christian Bioethics explore the implications of significant cultural changes that have impacted the taken-for-granted norms that undergird medicine and bioethics.
Religion, Spirituality, and Chaplains in the Biomedical Literature: 1965–2000
International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine, 2003
In recent years, several prominent medical journals have published articles addressing the relationship between religion/spirituality and medicine, and recognizing the importance of religion in the lives of most Americans, especially in times of illness. We hypothesized that the publication of these articles reflected a trend in the biomedical literature in which greater attention is being given to the role of religion and spirituality in health-care. A correlational design was used, based on an electronic survey of all articles in MEDLINE for the years 1965 through 2000. The search terms used were: 1) religion or religious; 2) spiritual; and 3) chaplain. The number of articles per 100,000 that mentioned religion (religion or religious), spirituality, or chaplains each year was determined. Statistically significant upward trends across years were found for the rates of articles addressing religion (r = .59, p < .001) and spirituality (r = .89, p < .001) and a non-significant trend was found for chaplains (r = .31). The rising rates of articles on religion and spirituality in biomedical journals suggest a growing recognition of the need to address spiritual and religious issues in health-care.
“Man’s Redemption of Man”: Medical Authority and Faith Healers in North America, 1850 - 1930
2020
This thesis discusses the various rhetorical, logical, and legal methods the medical profession used to regulate faith healing in North America. In so doing, it illuminates larger questions about the place of religion and authority over the body in modernity. It uses a source base of medical journals, legal documents, and church records to illustrate how doctors positioned themselves as the rational and godly choice for sick people. While faith healing was originally one of many "cures" and kinds of medicine available to North Americans during the 19 th century, the medical field rapidly professionalized and supported laws requiring anyone claiming to practice medicine to adhere to one form of scientificallybased medicine. To support this change, physicians used the category of "quackery," which implies backwardness and superstition, to illustrate the hazards of faith healing and other alternative medicines. Later, the rise of psychology in the 1890s reshaped physicians' view of faith healing, and they came to explain its claims of success by arguing that "suggestion," or messages to a person's unconscious beliefs, can cure particular (gendered) kinds of mental illnesses. Doctors and clergy became curious about the safe use of suggestion, and embarked on experiments like the Emmanuel Movement. In showing this trajectory, this thesis demonstrates the cooperation between the clergy and the medical profession to delineate what they believed was a "rational" form of Protestantism, in opposition to the perceived excesses of faith healers. The possibility of a rational Protestantism led clergy and physicians to cooperate in several investigations into faith healers' activities. Both professions lent their voices in support of the psychologized view of faith healing. Finally, this thesis examines legal documents and court cases involving faith healing, demonstrating the concrete application of medical authority in jurisdictions across North America. Through this examination, this thesis will suggest that medical culture and mainstream Protestantism deeply influenced each other in this period, complicating a conventional picture of them as completely separate modes of knowledge. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Firstly, I would like to thank my thesis supervisor, Professor Heather Murray, for making this process smooth and joyful as possible. She is a patient guide through the confusing procedural necessities of a program as well as an amazing scholar whose edits, book lists, and suggestions made this thesis what it is. I would also like to thank Professors Serge Durflinger and Béatrice Craig for agreeing to be readers and for their insight, despite the upheaval of COVID-19 making it all more difficult. Thank you especially to Professor Craig for first suggesting that I should try to do an MA. She made me realize the possibilities of doing history and mentored me throughout my undergraduate years-I would never have thought of any of this without her. I would also like to thank my parents, Glen and Debbie McIntyre, for all their support and love throughout my education. It would never have been possible without them putting me on the path and unconditionally supporting my goals. Additionally, thank you to all my friends, but especially Victoria Gauthier and Mike Scott, for putting up with my rambling about this dissertation's obscure subject matter and for being extremely supportive. Thank you to Dr. James Opp at Carleton University for fielding questions about his work, which was very helpful. I'd also like to thank Dr. Kevin Kee for putting me in touch with Dr. Opp. Thank you to Dr. Emma Anderson from UOttawa's religious studies department for talking over this thesis with me and lending me a book.