Is there a place for Christianity in the NHS?
At an Employment Tribunal Dr David Drew, 64, lost his claim for unfair dismissal against Walsall Hospital NHS Trust. The judge ruled that that there was “no place for religious references at work”. Dr Drew’s crime was to send an email containing the prayer of St. Ignatius Loyola to colleagues to encourage and motivate them. He also sent a text to a fellow consultant saying, “Have a peaceful Christmas.” This was perceived as being an “aggressive and unwelcome intrusion”. An internal investigation by members of the Trust concluded that Dr. Drew’s religious language was inappropriate in a professional setting and he was ordered to keep his religious views to himself. Dr. Drew could not accept this recommendation and was subsequently dismissed for “gross professional misconduct and insubordination”.
The belief that there is no place for religion references in the NHS is unacceptable for many reasons.
All men are spiritual as well as physical, psychological and social beings. The World Health organisation has defined health as well being in all these areas. Sir Kenneth Calman, when Chief Medical Officer, said in his ‘On the State of the Public Health’ report in 1997 emphasised that a pre-eminent concern for those making decisions about health must be a concern for individuals. He went on to explain that he meant care for the whole person which included,
“. . . holistic aspects to cover spiritual, social, psychological and spiritual aspects of life.”
How can the spiritual needs of patients be adequately addressed without reference to religion?
Doctors and medical students are trained to take patients’ histories by asking specific questions in the realms of physical symptoms, drug history, family history, past history, social history and spiritual arenas. These can all have relevance to a patient’s wellbeing. Good holistic medical practice in our hospitals and practices will necessitate all practitioners being aware of these holistic areas of need.
Trusts are very aware of this. They employ chaplains to help with the spiritual care of staff and patients. Chapels are provided where staff and patients can go to meditate, pray and hold services. Religion is part of the very nature of man so it cannot be excluded from our work. People need to be informed about these by notices and word of mouth. Gideon bibles and other religious books are freely available in our hospitals.
When patients are admitted to our hospitals they are asked about their religion. So clearly it is acceptable for religion to be talked about at work.
Trusts allow Sikhs and Muslims to wear religious clothing at work. These are not banned yet they make statements just as clearly as verbal statements made by Christians.
There is much evidence that patients benefit physically, emotionally and psychologically from having a faith. Studies show that having a personal faith gives over a ten per cent advantage. If it is negligent not to discuss a physical remedy with patients, is it not negligent not to discuss the advantages of having a faith?
All people, including doctors, nurses and hospital managers are spiritual beings. Unfortunately some worship themselves and reject any divine authority over them. Thus in George Bernard Shaw’s play “A Doctor’s Dilemma”, he introduces the doctor as,
“A self-made man who worships his creator.”
Self worship is a particular danger for those in authority, whether clinical or managerial. They can easily regress into a self-centred arrogance where others are not valued as much as themselves. This can result is an uncaring approach with resulting disharmonies.
Rules or laws can never be a substitute for personal faith in controlling personal standards. It is faith that leads people to “go the second mile” in serving both their patients and colleagues. If it is so important for staff to behave altruistically, how can it be wrong to discuss these matters at work? Over the centuries the selfless, moral practice of medicine has always been based on faith, whether Hippocratic or other religions. These standards are impressed on medical students so how can it be wrong to discuss them when in practice? How can reminding others to be give and not to count the cost and to do so because that pleases our creator be abhorrent?
Dearest Lord,
teach me to be generous;
teach me to serve You as You deserve;
to give and not to count the cost,
to fight and not to heed the wounds,
to toil and not to seek for rest,
to labour and not to ask for reward
save that of knowing I am doing Your Will. St. Ignatius of Loyola
When someone complains about such ideas being shared with them, the question must be asked about motives. Are they angry at the sharer or angry at God?
A central tenet of the teaching of Jesus Christ is that his people should share the good news with those they meet.
“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” Matthew 28:19-20
“And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God is making his appeal through us.” 2 Corinthians 5:19-20
Christians proclaim their belief in a loving, saving God not by the way they dress but by how they live and what they say. To prohibit Christians from talking about the gospel is blatant discrimination and persecution.
It is however vital to remind Christians about the character of their God. He described himself as,
“The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished . . .” Exodus 34 :6-7
These are therefore the characteristics that Christians must demonstrate at work and at home. The Spirit God has given Christians is ‘compassionate and gracious’. There can therefore be no place for forcing our views down others’ throats. Sensitivity is essential. After all if, if people reject us they will inevitably reject our message, a message they need. It is therefore very important that we always obtain consent to discuss any matter that may be contentious. If a discussion starts, then repeated consent is warranted. It is simple to ask, “Are you happy to discuss these matters?” It doesn’t matter whether the subject is sexual, personal or spiritual.
If all men have been created by God faith God-given instincts that life has a purpose, that values such as love honesty and integrity are real and are therefore God-given, is it wrong to behave as the prophets in the Old Testament, as John the Baptist as the apostles and the early church and primarily as Jesus did. Should all christians not be able to say with Paul:
“We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” 2 Corinthians 5:20-21
The question that needs to be asked is whether the Christian message is true. If Jesus did fulfil those prophecies about the Messiah in the Old Testament, if he did do those miracles and rise from the dead, if his disciples were so convinced that they were willing to die for what they knew to be true, if what Jesus taught agrees with the spiritual instincts within us, then how can it be wrong to encourage people, gently and with their consent, to think about eternal issues?
If we want our doctors and nurses to behave in a Christian, loving way, then it is surely important to explain why this is right. On 31 March 1949, Winston Churchill spoke at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Halfway through the speech Churchill presented a profound vision:
“I speak not only to those who enjoy the blessings and consolation of revealed religion but also to those who face the mysteries of human destiny alone. The flame of Christian ethics is still our highest guide. To guard and cherish it is our first interest, both spiritually and materially. The fulfillment of spiritual duty in our daily life is vital to our survival. Only by bringing it into perfect application can we hope to solve for ourselves the problems of this world and not of this world alone.”
