The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Using artificial body parts in medical training is causing dehumanisation in the medical practice

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/8/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 965 times Debate No: 43588
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




The use of artificial body parts is causing dehumanisation in the medical practice. I have spoken with people who have trained in recent years and I can see how much of the training has become very "success" or "failure" based. With many simple tasks such as stitching up a patients wound that have been practised beforehand on a "wound closure pad". Where the student will then receive a passing or failing mark. Does this make the treatment of people more like a game where, you can either achieve your goal or fail. Does it remove the focus from each individual and the specific case or illness they have presented with?

Dehumanisation in the medical practice has been a large issue for many decades, I ask are we coming even closer to treating patients more like objects that need to be fixed, than people who have presented with an illness or ailment that needs to be addressed.

If we continue on the path we are currently on, promoting the use of such training aids, are we in some way pushing away from the treatment of patients?

I am not sure at which point we would find our middle ground, the use of cadavers in medical training is still commonplace, this allows students to examine the body as a whole, having a somewhat personal interaction with not only the human form but also a person who may have been a patient before their arrival on table. However cadavers are not always available. Creating a market for artificial human parts to be used in training.

I suppose that I have two questions really, how can we create training tools in the future that allow us to take into account the variety and complexity of individual circumstances? And, Could artificial human parts be designed to in some way allow doctors to keep their ability to treat a person, rather than providing a solution to the problem presented to them?


Get over it
Debate Round No. 1


As a design student it is not really and issue that affects me (therefore I am already over it), more than something that would have been interesting to argue with someone over the age of 5.


cry about it
Debate Round No. 2


If I were to cry about it would I then be making the issue more human in the process.


TheDudeLeboski forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by STALIN 6 years ago
Wow Con is just too funny.
Posted by debate339 6 years ago
GO CON! im just kidding, while cons statement did make me laugh i still agree with the pro side therefor he is gonna win
Posted by brepar 6 years ago
wow, already decided my victor here.

pro used "and" in place of "an" in round 2 completely disrupting the flow of the debating for me.
he also insulted con, saying that con was unable to give an argument better than a 5 year old.

he's right.
Posted by kbub 6 years ago
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by NiqashMotawadi3 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was trolling.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.