In Kerr v. Hurd, a medical doctor specializing in obstetrics and gynecology (Kerr) claimed to have had his right to free expression and speech in academic areas deprived. The classroom content in question was whether it was appropriate for Kerr to teach certain gynecological surgery techniques over others and advocate for vaginal deliveries over cesarean.
Dr. Kerr was fired and claimed that this action came upon him in reaction to his classroom speech/content that should have been protected. Pavela points out that coincidentally, around the time the case was heard, some well regarded news sources (AP, NPR) had written about the overuse of tests and surgeries, cesareans included, suggesting the professor/doctor wasn't out of line with his beliefs regarding best practice.
First question: As department chair for a medical school, how would you discern what techniques and procedures should or shouldn't be taught to medical students? Would you be comfortable allowing your faculty to use their own professional judgment, or might you require certain conditions to be met first?
As it is the practice of medicine, I think a department chair should allow the professor/doctor to present all techniques/procedures applicable to the field. I even think he/she should bring up controversies, particularly if they are in the media. This allows for a time of great discussion and debate. I wonder if it wouldn't be prudent for the professor to remain neutral in his capacity as professor, but allow students to solicit his opinion and expertise in his professional capacity (maybe at his office or outside of school grounds). Would that be an issue?
Although I can't see myself ever being a department chair in a medical school, your question has been thinking about teaching in general and allowing for professional judgment. In this case, it is important to remember what first amendment standards apply and how they would come into play in situations of dual capacity as a department chair and representing a national organization. Yes, I would be comfortable allowing my faculty to use their own professional judgment in making decisions on how their courses should be taught. This Pavela report does make me think deeper about conflict of interest what might be present and when would an "academic exception" apply versus a bold statement that supports the individual faculty members interest and national organization
As an academic department, how do you protect yourself in cases such as this? I'm making an assumption here, but I don't think med school professors have enough time to go over several options or have a discussion about each procedure.
Should professors be free to express their judgments and preferences for treatment or should certain conditions be met first (ex. supported by peer reviewed medical journal, procedure widely accepted among professional organizations, etc.)?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn Kerr v. Hurd, a medical doctor specializing in obstetrics and gynecology (Kerr) claimed to have had his right to free expression and speech in academic areas deprived. The classroom content in question was whether it was appropriate for Kerr to teach certain gynecological surgery techniques over others and advocate for vaginal deliveries over cesarean.
ReplyDeleteDr. Kerr was fired and claimed that this action came upon him in reaction to his classroom speech/content that should have been protected. Pavela points out that coincidentally, around the time the case was heard, some well regarded news sources (AP, NPR) had written about the overuse of tests and surgeries, cesareans included, suggesting the professor/doctor wasn't out of line with his beliefs regarding best practice.
First question: As department chair for a medical school, how would you discern what techniques and procedures should or shouldn't be taught to medical students? Would you be comfortable allowing your faculty to use their own professional judgment, or might you require certain conditions to be met first?
As it is the practice of medicine, I think a department chair should allow the professor/doctor to present all techniques/procedures applicable to the field. I even think he/she should bring up controversies, particularly if they are in the media. This allows for a time of great discussion and debate. I wonder if it wouldn't be prudent for the professor to remain neutral in his capacity as professor, but allow students to solicit his opinion and expertise in his professional capacity (maybe at his office or outside of school grounds). Would that be an issue?
ReplyDeleteAlthough I can't see myself ever being a department chair in a medical school, your question has been thinking about teaching in general and allowing for professional judgment. In this case, it is important to remember what first amendment standards apply and how they would come into play in situations of dual capacity as a department chair and representing a national organization.
ReplyDeleteYes, I would be comfortable allowing my faculty to use their own professional judgment in making decisions on how their courses should be taught. This Pavela report does make me think deeper about conflict of interest what might be present and when would an "academic exception" apply versus a bold statement that supports the individual faculty members interest and national organization
As an academic department, how do you protect yourself in cases such as this? I'm making an assumption here, but I don't think med school professors have enough time to go over several options or have a discussion about each procedure.
ReplyDeleteShould professors be free to express their judgments and preferences for treatment or should certain conditions be met first (ex. supported by peer reviewed medical journal, procedure widely accepted among professional organizations, etc.)?