The Hippocratic tradition must not be lost. It is what safeguards professional identity and offers a core value such as trust, which is at the heart of medical practice. Thanks to that tradition, it is possible to give medical practice back its original force, which prompted practitioners to think first about the patient’s welfare and then about administrative interests; in other words, to do patients no harm, as opposed to benefiting from them as possible subjects of research; to give them the best care, rather than abusing them through haste, paperwork, or procedures.

This is not to say that the Hippocratic tradition operates to the detriment of economic and administrative matters. This tradition will lead to more rational use of resources, getting the most out of them without waste, respecting times, meeting schedules, and being patient with administrative procedures.

The patient, however, will always be paramount. This is based on a comprehensive vision of patients and those who care for them, one that knows how to combine the patient’s autonomy (or in the case of minors or the disabled, the autonomy of the parent or guardian) with that of health workers, preventing the imposition of patterns of action devoid of ethics and humanity. It is a holistic vision that knows how to exercise conscientious objection [9], when necessary, without allowing abuses by employers or contractors; one that knows how to apply a moderate form of paternalism that is a balm for the indifferent and aloof protection provided by health systems.

Only with professional practice supported by the Hippocratic tradition will it be possible to get past the frustration, discouragement and, frequently, the feeling of impotence in an environment that is hostile to humane and humanizing medical practice. Only with professional practice based on the Hippocratic tradition can the medical profession maintain its identity and repair or construct health systems on the basis of that identity, ones that genuinely contribute to the change found at the heart of the new notion of health [10], which goes beyond the concept formulated years ago by WHO.

The second characteristic of professional activity that merits comment is social responsibility. For the medical profession, social responsibility is derived from the people it serves, among other things. It is not at all poetic or lyrical to say that the present and the future are in the hands of health professionals, and how the present and future turn out depends on the care, skill, and competence with which patients are treated.

One of the practical applications of social responsibility is the ability professionals have to train the parents of their patients. Part of the education that new generations receive will depend on this. However, you cannot think that parents of patients only help them in medical topics. In addition to guidelines on care and protection, the physician also will give recommendations on prevention and healthy living to ensure a safe and positive course in life.

There is another front that warrants mention in relation to social responsibility. I am talking about the strategies that have been proposed in many health institutions to improve humanization [11]. Thanks to quality control offices or the concerns expressed by patients, their families, or the staff at these institutions, areas and situations have been detected where opportunities for improvement cannot wait.

The other way is to help staff members become “sensitive” to the need for humanization. This can be accomplished through “dynamics” and conferences designed to give people a “sense” of how they need to improve and why. Yet, this is not enough. Sensitivity is temporary, contingent, and variable; and what is built on that basis can change very easily, be forgotten, or cause fatigue that can chip away at efforts to humanize medical practice, making that goal fruitless.

There is a third option that allows for a better approach to the problem: raising consciousness. When reasons are taken into account, it is a different matter. If the objective is to humanize, you will want to enhance what is authentically human, both in personal and professional action. However, appreciation of what is authentically human depends on the conceptual framework being applied [12].

That conceptual basis can be found in humanism. However, the question is: What kind of humanism are we talking about? There are many versions in the history of human thought. Renaissance humanism, socialist humanism, existentialist and hermeneutic humanism, anti-humanism and the new humanism or integral humanism are some examples.

It is not necessary to explain each of them, only to jot down the characteristics of humanism that seem to respond more to reality. The new humanism is based on the following propositions: man is a personal being, human uniqueness demands defense; it is essential to emerge from relativism and any sort of reductionism. In addition, it assumes that truth exists and can be known; the human person is free and capable of responsibility; freedom is connected with the individual good and the common good; the human person is worthy and deserving of respect; the human body is a human person (Fig. 7.2).