[Bioethics and the Hippocratic oath]

Abstract

Throughout the long centuries of medical activity, the Hippocratic Oath always had a distinguished place and role within the self definition of curative practice: it contains in a condensed form those ethical principles and moral norms that determine the doctors' behavior and their relationships with their patients and colleagues. The Hippocratic Oath is not the only oath but it is surely the best known and most famous one, that contains both timeless and age dependent norms. The ceremonial taking of the Oath is still a symbol of moral commitment for doctors. The millennia long adherence to the Oath perhaps suggests a timeless stature above all changes of society, but tracing its history, it becomes apparent that, though the text remained essentially the same, the interpretation is greatly influenced by the values and norms of the given age. Even so, the Oath's deontological, normative attribute has made it possible to fulfill its morally regulating role both of level of the profession and the individual, up to the middle of the 20. century. Today, however, classic, bipolar medicine has become complex and varied. Medicine and society have both undergone changes. Bioethics has appeared and become widely accepted. All this raises the question whether the Oath is still suitable for a modern statement of the moral identity of medical practitioners. Does it still have a compulsory force beyond keeping the tradition, and can its norms still be realized in practice? Both the study of texts used for the Oath in Hungarian universities, and the international proposal for modernization--together with the arguments that followed--indicate that if the traditional oath wishes to fulfill its function in the age of modern medicine, it has to adhere to the more up-to-date principles of bioethics, that better correlate with today's expectations.