ABSTRACT
The Hippocratic Oath is often thought to mark the beginning of ethical practice among doctors. This is, however, largely a modern invention. As Nutton (1993) points out, ‘no other document from the ancient world, save for the Bible has undergone so many transformations and yet retains authority today’. Part of the reason for this authority is that the Oath, like much of the Hippocratic corpus, is consistent with Christian values, so that it quickly became assimilated into the early Christian church (Temkin, 1991). Indeed, as Nutton (1993) also points out, the Oath is frequently cited by those who perceive that Christian values are ebbing and that any given community may be experiencing a decline in ethical standards. Such perceptions were evident in Germany (1960s), Italy (1970s) and Russia (1990s). The decision of the British Medical Association to press for a commitment by all new graduates to an ‘updated Hippocratic Oath’ in 1995 may reflect similar concerns. Nevertheless, the Oath was by no means the only ethical code for doctors, either in antiquity, or since. Nor should it be assumed that the adoption of an ethical code was motivated by purely altruistic considerations. The various Hippocratic writings clearly assert ‘that the morality they were advocating was a useful weapon in the struggle for patients’ (Nutton, 1993). Similarly, Jonsen (1990) has argued that the Oath was almost certainly motivated by professional self-interest and designed to ensure a plentiful supply of patients.
