|
|
|
(Page 4 of 4)
Do medical dramas' benefits outweigh their negative
aspects? Possibly, but there is far from a consensus among
physicians. Kevin Goodman, an instructor at the Center for
Ethics, Humanities and Palliative Care at the University of
Rochester, cautions viewers to recognize these shows' primary
purpose. "They're entertainment first," he commented
in the Orange Country Register. "It's just compelling drama
that tries to be medically accurate. But in the end, the writers
have got to sell to viewers." Medical dramas try to appeal
to all viewers and cannot be restricted by a sense of public
health responsibility.
That's not to say that the writers always get it wrong. An
episode in the second season of "Grey's Anatomy" showed
a fifteen-year-old paraplegic who wanted to have surgery so
that she wouldn't need the catheter that she had endured for
many years. "The writer of that episode was giving a talk
about how to become a writer in Hollywood when a young
woman came up to her," recalled Elizabeth Klaviter, director
of medical research of "Grey's Anatomy." "The woman
said that she and her parents wept when they were watching
that show because it was her story."
Both viewers and healthcare professionals should approach
medical dramas with a healthy dose of caution.
Audiences must be willing to question the validity of the
various aspects of medicine depicted in each episode, and
the healthcare community must be ready to confront and
correct inaccurate information distilled through the media.
Every action taken by Grey's Anatomy's Dr. Preston
Burke or E.R.'s Luka Kovac shapes a public understanding
of medicine, whether accurately or erroneously. Hollywood
has the power to present and distort facts and perceptions
in the medical world - our responsibility is to discuss and
research what is real.
Richard Kim is a freshman at Yale University.
<<Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
|
|
