What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. It is a question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity.
It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work.
As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms.
A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a fixed archetype. They are someone who questions assumptions, listens deeply, and adapts with humility to the needs of patients and society. Until our systems are designed to allow such physicians to thrive, we risk losing not only their presence, but their purpose.
Comments