I'll take your part when darkness comes, and pain is all around. Like a bridge over troubled water, I'll lay me down. 《Bridge Over Troubled Water》 by Paul Simon An experienced obstetrician who had delivered over 30 000 babies tragically took her own life after months of relentless online harassment. Despite successfully saving a pregnant patient from amniotic fluid embolism with an emergency hysterectomy, the doctor faced online attacks months over the patient's loss of fertility (https://www.peopleapp.com/column/30049925292-500006424970). This case is a sobering reminder of the need to protect the welfare of those who dedicate their lives to saving that of others, and it underscores the unique and heavy burden borne by obstetricians in China. Out of all medical specialties, obstetrics stands out as one of the most gruelling, with obstetricians having to work long unsociable hours, performing emergency caesarean sections, and sacrificing personal time to monitor maternal and foetal well-being in high-risk pregnancies. Yet their financial remuneration often struggles to fully reflect the physical and mental toll of the job. Worse still, they sometimes might face complaints from patients and families when there is a pregnancy adverse outcome or when treatments (like an emergency hysterectomy) require difficult patient trade-offs with limited support. Medical practice inherently involves navigating complex decisions under conditions of uncertainty, and adverse outcomes often stem from the inherent limitations of medical knowledge rather than clinical negligence. Unfortunately, media sensationalism over these events has tarnished the entire medical profession, while corruption scandals also risk tarring all healthcare workers with the same brush. Violence against health professionals is a global public health problem. In China, positive steps have been taken, such as the 2015 Criminal Law Amendment in curbing overt disruptions, and in 2019, China's top legislators approved the first comprehensive law to protect healthcare workers, which reflects the Chinese government's firm commitment to protecting medical order and safeguarding healthcare workers, yet challenges remain (Zhang et al., Med Sci Monit, 2021, 27, e928393), particularly regarding online misconduct and psychological pressures (Xiao et al., Front Public Health, 2022, 10, 978322). In China, violence against healthcare professionals is gradually shifting from overt acts (hospital disruptions, physical assault) to covert ones (online aggression, cyberbullying). Nevertheless, heightened vigilance is warranted against this emerging type of abuse. When confronted with adverse outcomes, sensational online content often fuels unfounded complaints from the public and exacerbates medical disputes. Consequently, these outcomes, amplified by biased media platforms, are subjected to unfair public trials, placing unneeded pressure on the medical profession. All healthcare workers deserve respect and a civilised culture to deliver high quality healthcare (Dubb et al., BMJ, 2015, 350, h2780). Tolerance of abuse breeds low morale and psychological trauma among the healthcare individuals intending to help others (Merrill et al., JAMA, 2017, 317, 2373–4). Further improvements could include mandatory professional indemnity insurance for healthcare professionals, public health literacy initiatives to foster informed patient expectations, and the prioritisation of medical-related online civility. The medical profession faces fundamental tensions between human limitations and healing aspirations, but for those obstetricians and other frontline doctors, it is important for them to hold fast to the commitment to healing and to move forward with hope, for every effort to uphold professionalism and compassion is a step towards a brighter, more supportive healthcare future. As Paul Simon's lyrics suggest, bridging divides requires both legal frameworks and mutual understanding. The author takes full responsibility for this article. The author has nothing to report. The author confirms that the manuscript was written without the use of any generative AI or AI-assisted technology. The author declares no conflicts of interest. The author has nothing to report.
Rui‐Hong Xue (Thu,) studied this question.