The Power of Presence: What Art Can Teach Us About the Physician-Patient Relationship

Many medical schools offer students classes in the visual arts (S. Nijim et al, 2023). Art is used to promote skills development, including “physician communication, critical thinking skills, teamwork, empathy, tolerance for ambiguity, resilience, observation skills, and creativity.” Id. These are critically important skills for physicians and other healthcare professionals.  

Art can also serve an additional purpose: it can offer healthcare professionals the opportunity to see themselves and what they do through others’ eyes. Two well-known works – created in different eras by very different artists – that are often used to educate aspiring healthcare professionals offer useful insights into patient and family perceptions of the experience of receiving healthcare.  

“The Doctor,” by Sir Luke Fildes (1891). View this image here.

In 1877, Sir Luke Fildes’s young son died from tuberculosis. At the time, there was little effective treatment that a physician could offer a patient like Fildes’s son. Antibiotics capable of curing tuberculosis were not discovered and mass-produced until after World War II (J. Gale, 2025).  

“The Doctor” was commissioned by Sir Henry Tate, who wanted a work of “social realism” and allowed Fildes to choose the subject (Y. Barilan, 2007). Fildes reportedly sought to “put on record the status of the doctor in our own time.” (J. Moore, 2008). It is thought that Fildes was so moved by the care that his son received from his physician, Dr. Gustavus Murray, that it inspired “The Doctor.” This piece does not directly depict Fildes’s own experience / the death of Fildes’s son. In addition to the humble setting of the painting, the lower socioeconomic status of the subjects, and the (female) gender of the patient, commentators note that the lamp in the room is said to represent hope for the patient, and the dawn light in the room is used to suggest the possibility of recovery (e.g., S. Wilson, 1990).  

In “The Doctor,” Fildes did not seek to represent the state of medical knowledge/medical advancement at the time. Commentators note that common medical equipment, including a stethoscope, is not depicted. The tools of treatment that are visible in the portrait are simple – a mortar and pestle, a cup and spoon, possibly a bottle of honey or other tincture on the table. Fildes’s objective was to inspire appreciation for the doctor and the power of a physician-patient relationship. What distinguishes the doctor in the portrait is his presence, focused attention, and empathy. He is sitting scant inches from the patient, watching his every breath. The child’s mother has buried her head in her arms at a table several feet away. The child’s father is pulled in two directions – his attention is on his son, but he can stand with and comfort his wife – because the doctor is there, and the doctor’s singular focus is on his patient – the child.  

***

Compare this picture of “The Doctor” with the picture located here.  

What do you see? More to the point: what did the 7-year-old artist/patient and her family see?  

As in Fildes’s picture, the patient is in the center of the picture – but in an outfitted medical office, not at home. There is family present – the patient’s older sister is sitting in a chair, as is the patient’s mother, who is holding the patient’s baby sister. Unlike “The Doctor,” everyone is smiling – presumably, the child is healthy, or her condition – if she has one – has improved.  

But where is the doctor? Although he too, is smiling, he is hunched over his computer, presumably preparing his note for the patient’s electronic health record. In contrast to “The Doctor,” whose attention was focused with laser-like intensity on his patient, this doctor has his back to the patient and her family. His attention appears to be wholly absorbed by what he is typing. The contrast with “The Doctor” could not be more stark.    

When the physician saw his patient’s drawing, he wrote a caption for it: “The economic stimulus bill has directed $20 billion to health care information technology, largely funding electronic medical record incentives. I wonder how much this technology will really cost?” Id. When it was published, the picture caused great consternation about the impact of technology on the physician-patient relationship. One might ask whether “pajama time,” or the practice of preparing chart notes at home after “normal” work hours, was precipitated by backlash against this and similar images of professionals whose attention was pre-empted by screens instead of patients.  

In addition to serving as a useful way to document the history of medical care and scientific innovation, art can provide us with both aspirational and cautionary views of the physician-patient relationship and the importance of presence. Portraits like “The Doctor” inspire students to embody the experience of caring for their patients. Pictures like the crayon drawing remind students that there is more to being present than being in the room. For conveying important lessons like this one to aspiring healthcare professionals, a picture, as they say, is worth a thousand words.  

Works Cited

S. Nijim, et al, Prevalence of visual art education in medical school curricula: a national survey of US medical schools, Med. Educ. Online. 2023 Nov 2; 28(1):2277500.doi, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10627040/ (accessed May 29, 2026).

Image: “The Doctor,” by Sir Luke Fildes (1891)

J. Gale, “When Was TB Finally Curable?” Online. 2025 Nov 13,  https://iere.org/when-was-tb-finally-curable/ (accessed May 29, 2026).  

See Y. Barilan, “The Doctor by Luke Fildes:  an icon in context,” 28 The Journal of Medical Humanities (No. 2, 59-80) (June 2007).

J. Moore, What Sir Luke Fildes’ 1887 painting The Doctor can teach us about the practice of medicine today,” 58 Br. J. of Gen. Pract. 210-213 (No. 508) (March 2008). (This article identifies “The Doctor” as painted in 1887. All of the other sources I checked state that the work was painted between 1890 and 1891 and exhibited in 1891.) 

S. Wilson, The Tate Gallery: An Illustrated Companion to the National Collections of British & Modern Art. London, UK: Tate Gallery Publications; 1990.  

Image: Copyright 211, Thomas G. Murphy, MD, published in  E. Toll, “The Cost of Technology,” 307. J.A.M.A. (No. 203), https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1187932 (accessed May 29, 2026).