Volume 4, Number 1, 7-19, DOI: 10.1007/s11673-007-9031-z

Two into One Won’t Go: Conceptual, Clinical, Ethical and Legal Impedimenta to the Convergence of CAM and Orthodox Medicine

Malcolm Parker

View Related Documents

Abstract

The convergence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and evidence-based medicine (EBM) is a prominent feature of healthcare in western countries, but it is currently undertheorised, and its implications have been insufficiently considered. Two models of convergence are described – the totally integrated evidence-based model (TI) and the multicultural-pluralistic model (MP). Both models are being incorporated into general medical practice. Against the background of the reasons for the increasing utilisation of CAM by the public and by general practitioners, TI-convergence is supported and MP-convergence is rejected. MP-convergence is epistemologically and clinically incoherent, and it cannot be regulated. It is also inconsistent with developments in the legal determination of the standard of care for both diagnosis/treatment and disclosure. These claims concerning MP-convergence are justified by the fact that science is not a member of the group of perspectives or world-views which postmodernism treats as equally valid, and this is especially important for healthcare.

Keywords  Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) - Evidence-based medicine (EBM) - Integrative medicine - Science - Postmodernism - Regulation - Standard of care - General practice

Fulltext Preview

Image of the first page of the fulltext document