Format neededEdit

I can tell ya now that this page, as it is now, is gonna get a lashing, not only because it is unformatted but also because it does not cite its sources - which does not come from Star Trek episode of film. It also appears to be in violation of copyright, although I'm not sure of that. However, the info is obviously copied from another work or site. Anyway, a simple description of what the oath is would suffice. --Shran 04:12, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I think it probably will. For starters, it should contain the hippocratic oath as it was recited by the Doctor in "Darkling".
"I swear this oath by Apollo Physician, by Asclepius, by Health and by all the gods and godesses: In whatsoever place that I enter I will enter to help the sick and heal the injured, and I will do no harm."

- AJHalliwell 04:23, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Well of course the oath is copied from another site I cant make an original work of a specific document, its like telling me not to wrote down the pledge of allegience on thsi sight because i did not put it in my own words. and according to AJ it was stated In 2373, after the Doctor's program malfunctioned, and he killed several Mikhal Travelers, and hurt Kes, he recited the Hippocratic Oath to himself, mentioning Hippocrates. (VOY: "Darkling") --Kahless 04:23, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)
True, but AJ also agreed that it would be receiving a lashing soon. I see your point, though; however, I didn't mean to make it sound like there was no other way to put the information in the article: I'm saying the oath itself, at least quite a bit of it, probably shouldn't be in the article. There were only parts of the oath mentioned in the shows, such as the one AJ provided; those parts will probably be the only parts allowed to remain in the article. Then again, only part of the song "A British Tar" was sung in Star Trek: Insurrection, but the article includes the entire song, so... you never know. Anyways, just leave it like it is and we'll see what becomes of it (try to wikify it a bit, though). --Shran 04:31, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)
Righty oh I'm on thatKahless 04:50, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  • Also, maybe as a side note, maybe not, in "The Breach" Doctor Phlox said that the Denobulan equivalent of the Hippocratic Oath said that a Doctor can never treat a patient against their will. (putting it here, as it's inuse) - AJHalliwell 04:37, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)

In all honesty, there is going to be nothing left of the article regardless to how much editing is done to it. "Darkling" is the only episode that references it and what was mentioned in it, plus a tidbit about Hippocrates is all that the page will contain. --Alan del Beccio 04:46, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I am hoping that the atricle will be able to stay as "A British Tar" was left in and thats only a very short part of of sung, where as hippocrates and that aoth have been cited alot more than than--Kahless 04:50, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)

WEll for one, both were not cited, and secondly, who is to say "A British Tar" is correct? Whatever version the Doctor cited seems to vary from both and should be referenced separately from the two we know of. --Alan del Beccio 04:55, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)

The doctors citing must be wrong because health is not a god, how about jsut leaving in teh classical version and making the part the doctor cited italicized--Kahless
  • We can only use what trek gives us. Jaf 02:29, 30 Jul 2005 (UTC)Jaf
I think it's implied he's swearing "on Health", not necessarily that Health is a god. - AJHalliwell 02:33, 30 Jul 2005 (UTC)
then the doctor has bad grammar because his statement implies the god health, unless they added that because he couldn't pronouce the real words which were, "Hygieia and Panaceia"--Kahless 02:46, 30 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I could well believe that, in Star Trek, if you're swearing to gods no-one believes in any more (and in fact that people know for a fact were aliens), you can also swear to an abstract noun.

Taking the Oath? Edit

The EMH Doctor's recitation of the Hippocratic Oath seen at the end of VOY: "Darkling" is an abridgement of the original oath, doubtless edited for sentimental purposes.

More interesting is the use of the Hippocratic Oath. I am certain that it is included because everybody "knows" what it means to doctors, but the truth actually doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

When I took my medical degree, I didn't take the Hippocratic Oath, but instead declared a statement based on articles from the 1968 Geneva Convention on Human rights. The original Hippocratic Oath demands, for example, swearing on deities no-one prays to any more, not practising any surgery, not terminating pregnancy, and avoiding sexual relationships with the slaves of the patient. Most of the oath isn't relevant in today's medicine, let alone the future's. I don't feel any more allegiance to the Hippocratic Oath than the Declaration of Arbroath.

Today's doctors are faced with ethical dilemmas about Human embryo research, about cloning technology, about Human rights abuses (including medical participation in interrogation and torture), about euthanasia, and a host of other ethical issues. Some of this (but not much) is covered in the Geneva Convention.

In Star Trek, doctors are faced with encounters with other species (specifically, what duty of care do Human doctors have to other species?); artificial life forms like Data, replacement of whole organs (like Worf's spinal cord: TNG: "Ethics"), prosthetic organs like Picard's artificial heart, cyborg implants such as those of Seven of Nine and so on. We have a Prime Directive which guides our actions on reaching other cultures. It would seem sensible that some sort of medical directives would exist on ethics in these situations- and that it wouldn't start with swearing by Asclepius. Vivienne marcus 00:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

It is still canon that it is used, though, as you said we saw a version of it being recited. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)