Abstract
Traditional historiography tends to draw a negative picture of British doctors’ ethics during the long nineteenth century. The medical professional ethics of this period have been described as self-serving and as a tool to monopolise the health care market. In this paper I attempt to challenge this rather one-sided view by looking into evidence for the practice of medical ethics, not just its normative texts. Focusing on the disciplinary function of the General Medical Council and discussing a variety of its cases, from fraudulent registration, sexual misconduct and breach of confidence to negligence, covering unqualified assistants and advertising, I argue that nineteenth-century medical ethics aimed at supporting the interests of patients and of the public at large as well as the reputation of the profession.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
