Changing Our Metaphors to Put Quality of Life at the Center of Health Care

  • George J. Annas


Metaphors matter, as America’s defunct health insurance financing debate so well demonstrated. In that debate the traditional metaphor of American medicine, the military metaphor, was displaced in public discourse by the market metaphor. Metaphors, which entice us to understand and experience “one kind of thing in terms of another... play a central role in the construction of social and political reality.”1 The market metaphor proved virtually irresistible in the public arena, and led Congress to defer to market forces to “reform” health insurance financing in America.


Health Insurance Financing American Medicine High Quality Health Care Health Care Financing System American Health Care System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors we live by, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Childress J. Who should decide? Paternalism in health care. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982: 7.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sontag S. Illness as metaphor and AIDS and its metaphors, New York: Doubleday, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fussell R. The great war and modern memory, New York: Oxford U. Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Keegan J. A history of warfare, New York: Vintage Books, 1994: 56–7.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beisecker AE, Beisecker TD. Using metaphors to characterize doctor-patient relationships: paternalism versus consumerism. Health Communication 1993; 5: 4I - 58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eckholm E. While congress remains silent, health care transforms itself, New York Times, Dec. 18, 1994: I, 34 (quoting Uwe Reinhardt).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reiman AS. Shattack lecture: the health care industry: where is it taking us? N Engl J Med 1991: 854–859.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reiman AS. What market values are doing to medicine. Atlantic Monthly, March 1992: 99–106.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bill and Hill, auditions for “Americas’ funniest health videos”, Boston Globe, March 27, 1994: 70.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Horwitz WA. Characteristics of environmental ethics: environmental activists’ accounts. Ethics & Behavior 1994: 4: 345–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thomas L. The Lives of a cell. New York: Viking, 1974.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Potter, VR. Bioethics: Bridge to the future. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice - Hall, 1971.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sessions G. Ed. Deep ecology for the twenty-first century. Boston: Shambhala, 1995.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaylin W. Faulty diagnosis: why Clinton’s health-care plan won’t cure what ails us. Harper’s, Oct., 1993, 57–62.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Editorial, Population health looking upstream. Lancet 1994; 343–429–30.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McKinlay JB. A case for refocusing upstream: the political economy of illness. Proceedings of American Heart Association Conferences on Applying Behavioral Science to Cardiovascular Risk. Seattle: American Health Association, 1974.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dubos R. Mirage of health. New York: Harper, 1959: 233.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Friedman E. An ethic for all of us. Healthcare Forum J. March, 1991: 11–12.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Havel V. The new measure of man, New York Times, July 8, 1994: A27.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • George J. Annas
    • 1
  1. 1.Health Law DepartmentBoston University Schools of Medicine and Public HealthBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations