Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The recognition that doctors discriminate against patients is not new. The US Institute of Medicine’s 2002 exhaustive investigation into disparities in healthcare concluded that social stereotyping and attitudes are often biased to the extent that even egalitarian well meaning doctors can harbour unconscious negative attitudes that stigmatise minority ethnic and racial groups (1). A follow up study by Physicians for Human Rights confirmed that stereotyping and bias subvert healthcare across the full spectrum of diseases and treatments (2) .
More recently a magisterial BMA Board of Science report revealed that the majority of premature deaths (on average men with mental health problems die 20 years, and women 15 years, earlier than the general population) could have been prevented with timely medical intervention (3), and that discriminatory attitudes towards mental health and learning disability patients persist across the health sector (4).
Doctors' sympathy with the application of human rights values to medical practice remains stubbornly negligible, yet discrimination is the sine qua non of human rights violations while only one of eighty clauses in Good Medical Practice specifically proscribes discrimination.
1. Smedley BD, Stith AY, Nelson AR. Unequal treatment: confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. p 172 Washington: National Academy Press, 2002 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10260 (accessed 5/12/15)
3. BMA Board of Science. Recognising the importance of physical health in mental health and intellectual disability - achieving parity of outcomes. p1. British Medical Association 2014. (accessed 5/12/15)
4. BMA Board of Science. Recognising the importance of physical health in mental health and intellectual disability - achieving parity of outcomes. p72. British Medical Association 2014. (accessed 5/12/15)
Re: Unconscious bias harms patients and staff
The recognition that doctors discriminate against patients is not new. The US Institute of Medicine’s 2002 exhaustive investigation into disparities in healthcare concluded that social stereotyping and attitudes are often biased to the extent that even egalitarian well meaning doctors can harbour unconscious negative attitudes that stigmatise minority ethnic and racial groups (1). A follow up study by Physicians for Human Rights confirmed that stereotyping and bias subvert healthcare across the full spectrum of diseases and treatments (2) .
More recently a magisterial BMA Board of Science report revealed that the majority of premature deaths (on average men with mental health problems die 20 years, and women 15 years, earlier than the general population) could have been prevented with timely medical intervention (3), and that discriminatory attitudes towards mental health and learning disability patients persist across the health sector (4).
Doctors' sympathy with the application of human rights values to medical practice remains stubbornly negligible, yet discrimination is the sine qua non of human rights violations while only one of eighty clauses in Good Medical Practice specifically proscribes discrimination.
1. Smedley BD, Stith AY, Nelson AR. Unequal treatment: confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. p 172 Washington: National Academy Press, 2002 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10260 (accessed 5/12/15)
2. Physicians for Human Rights. The right to equal treatment. p1. Boston 2003.
http://www2.paeaonline.org/index.php?ht=a/GetDocumentAction/i/135605 (accessed 5/12/15)
3. BMA Board of Science. Recognising the importance of physical health in mental health and intellectual disability - achieving parity of outcomes. p1. British Medical Association 2014. (accessed 5/12/15)
4. BMA Board of Science. Recognising the importance of physical health in mental health and intellectual disability - achieving parity of outcomes. p72. British Medical Association 2014. (accessed 5/12/15)
5. GMC. Good Medical Practice p20. http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/index.asp (accessed 5/12/15)
Competing interests: No competing interests