TY - JOUR T1 - Touch in the consultation JF - British Journal of General Practice JO - Br J Gen Pract SP - 147 LP - 148 DO - 10.3399/bjgp12X630133 VL - 62 IS - 596 AU - Carter Singh AU - Drew Leder Y1 - 2012/03/01 UR - http://bjgp.org/content/62/596/147.abstract N2 - Touch is arguably one of the most important of the five senses classified by Aristotle. The role of touch is firmly anchored in Biblical scriptures where it served as a vehicle for blessing and healing; for example, Isaac blessed his son Jacob by laying hands, and Jesus cured countless sick people of their ailments through touch.The amygdala is associated with emotional reactions linked to human proximity,1 but touch cannot be understood purely in terms of proprioceptors, dorsal root ganglia, and the like. Modern medicine need not deviate from more traditional frameworks in which touch is understood humanistically and interpersonally, involving the expression of empathy and solidarity. Touch has the potential to communicate, soothe, and heal, and medicine is diminished if it avoids the exploration and utilisation of the power of touch.Many of the commonly used consultation models in general practice employ the traditional framework of history, examination, diagnosis, and the formulation and negotiation of a treatment plan. In the clinical examination touch is re-framed as ‘palpation’ probing for abnormalities or percussing a chest. Touch is then used to explore the body-object. While this is an important diagnostic modality, it also can leave the patient feeling neglected or objectified.2 The patient's disease process can itself foster feelings of confusion, powerlessness, and isolation which may be exacerbated when he or she is examined by a physician or admitted to a hospital, identity-banded, disrobed, then poked and probed in a way that may prove de-humanising.3Along with this ‘objectifying touch’ much of … ER -