On taking oaths

Re. Lloyd Mancherter’s letter, Let the public speak (Castanet, March 12)

In his recent letter, Lloyd Manchester wrote about the Kelowna city councillors failing to live up to their oath to do what’s best for the residents by listening to their concerns.

What does an oath mean these days? Originally, it meant that one risked one’s life if they broke it. I’m asserting councillors should face the firing squad, but take a doctors oath (as an example). Do you think they swear on the Hippocratic Oath when they graduate—think again.

There exists several versions of their oath and not one is accredited to Hippocrates. Not one starts with “First, do no harm.” How does that make you feel as a patient?

There is no prohibition against abortion and no promise to not give “lethal” medicine. Instead, it panders to a more complex community now than in ancient Greek times and addresses the concerns of a more inclusive and diverse society— as if those are the rightful concerns of one’s doctor.

The doctor-patient relationship is the only concern at issue. Humans haven’t changed one iota since Hippocrate’s time.

To concentrate on the patient’s needs, exclusive of all else, should be the doctor’s focus, not their college, not the health minister, not some external world health authority and certainly not the “propaganda” delivered by the pharmaceutical representatives.

For major changes in how the direction the city should develop or issues of wide public concern, they should be at least publicized widely and perhaps put to referendums.

For issues of medical concern, those should be advised on by one’s doctor alone.

Steve Friedman, West Kelowna