Chapter in:
Argumentation between Doctors and Patients: Understanding clinical argumentative discourseFrans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen and Nanon Labrie
[Not in series 235] 2021
► pp. 1–12
Argumentation between doctors and patients
Verbal interaction between doctors and patients is inherent to
the medical profession. When the communicative interaction between doctors
and patients is aimed at exchanging different viewpoints through discussion
in order to reach a (treatment) decision, it can be said that the dialogue
that emerges is argumentative in nature. It is important to note here that
the term ‘argumentation’ bears no negative connotation. Rather it refers to
a resolution-oriented process that is aimed at justifying or refuting a
standpoint – an opinion, judgment, preference, or recommendation at issue in
the discourse. Medical consultation can be referred to as an argumentative
activity type. This means that the argumentative discourse between doctors
and patients is influenced by the rules, standards, and conventions that
apply to medical consultation. Argumentative processes between doctors and
patients can be understood through careful study of their discourse. In
doing so, a theoretical approach is required that makes clear how the
argumentative discourse concerned is to be analyzed and evaluated. The
pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation, which forms the theoretical
framework of this volume, can be used to describe the use of argumentation
in clinical settings as well as to evaluate the uses of argumentation in
doctor-patient communication. This is particularly useful for anyone who
seeks to both understand and improve the use of argumentation in
practice.