News Report / Profile
Recorded interview with Professor Gomes-Pedro
«Each one of us, no matter our age, has a new cycle ahead. We need to take advantage of these cycles in order to do what we believe is our duty and where we have a responsibility to intervene. This applies to everyone. No one does anything alone, and I did nothing alone, I did it as part of a team. It is to all the people who have worked with me that I would like to leave a message, and an embrace of gratitude, courage, and strength, to encourage them to continue to follow the same path, and do together what, at the end of the day, is the immense task of what still needs to be accomplished.»
Given that human beings are the image of the institutions they represent, the Newsletter of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Lisbon could not miss the opportunity to mark the retirement of such a prominent figure – as a man, professor, and doctor –, Professor João Gomes-Pedro, who made a point of stressing that this is but the beginning of a new cycle.
Newsletter: Professor Gomes-Pedro, before we continue, we would like to thank you for your availability. It gives us great pleasure to be able to publish an interview with you on the occasion of your retirement. We would like to know how you view yourself as a person, professor, and as doctor, and how you did manage to combine these three facets throughout your life.
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: I thank you for this honour. In a nutshell, when you ask me to define myself, I will always say that I see myself as an academic. What does this mean? An academic is someone who is demanding with regard to knowledge, with regard to others (students, colleagues, peers, representatives of the civil society, etc.) and who is responsible for change. An academic has the moral duty to bring about change, in a proactive and positive sense, with regard to what he perceives as being gaps or as turning point opportunities towards the goal one intends to meet. If you ask me to describe myself as an academic (as long as I live, I will be an academic: an academic does not retire, he may, at best, become an emeritus professor), I wanted to be an academic with a responsibility for change. And I have been involved in several changes at the university. If I were to turn back, I would do the same things again. Many things would not occur in the same way, but I would follow the same ideal, and I would try again to accomplish a constructive and significant change in the life of the university, and, more precisely, in the life of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Lisbon.
Newsletter: In what concerns the changes you mentioned, which would you highlight?
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: As an academic, I have always privileged three areas: research, teaching, and clinical practice. I see myself as a doctor, as a paediatrician, but a clinical person who does not teach and carry out research is someone with “broken legs”. With regard to the very pertinent question about my involvement in change, I would say that it was only after twenty-five years as a doctor, researcher, and lecturer, that I realised that I could only aim to get some of those changes to the end-recipients if I got involved in education. To implement change without involving educational strategies is to work in vain. My involvement in education started with the work of Professor Carlos Ribeiro. I participated actively in the GEPOG (Office for Postgraduate Studies of FMUL), and subsequently, thanks to the proactive and intelligent work of Professor Torres Pereira, I became the Director of DEM (Department for Medical Education). This was like a breath of fresh air, so to speak, for this Faculty, as over fifty lecturers undertook medical training. In this first investment in education, I did not deal with paediatric medical education, but with inclusive medical education, and we embarked on several types of reform at the Faculty of Medicine of Lisbon, of which I would highlight the planning and preparation of the Master Degree in Medical Education. We offered two Master Degrees in Medical Education, training about fifty lecturers, some of them full professors, who became master degree students despite being full professors already, and we trained these fifty lecturers, who were subsequently able to implement change at their respective departments, clinics, and institutes. This intervention, first at GEPOG, then at DEM, was preceded by something else in my capacity as president of the Pedagogical Council. I organised a meeting with practically all full professors and senior associate lecturers of FMUL. As students, and with two professors of medical education from the Sorbonne, we spent three days at a hotel in Sesimbra working night and day on the changes that were necessary to put into practice. This was due to the fact that the strategies required to enforce the necessary change in departments and in each sector of the university life of FMUL could only succeed if we had an educational methodology and intervention, and resorted to competences acquired through education. This was one of the things that did work out. Much of current reform, and of reform carried out at that time (or attempts to reform), took place then. For instance, setting up the Institute of Introduction to Medicine and corresponding subject, a turning point in medical education strategy, dates from that period. Our first year students started to undergo traineeships and carry out educational visits to social centres, prisons, crèches, immigrant centres, centres for the support of some ethnic groups, such as the gypsy community, which meant that our future doctors were able to experience society as it really was, and this was fundamental. It was not possible to have a complete turn-around, but, at the same time the length of the medical degree was shortened, it constituted a crucial opportunity to humanize the training of medical students. However, I would say that it was necessary to acknowledge the absence of an educational structure and of an educational competence, which made us spend around twelve years of our university life leading the department of medical education of the Faculty, to make us try to implement reform at that time. This had a direct impact, such as the Introduction to Medicine subject, and, later on, it had a significant “knock-on-effect” on the distinct areas of activity at our Faculty.
Newsletter: As you followed up the evolution of Paediatrics in Portugal, where you played a major role, which stages would you like to highlight? We would like you to describe the role of FMUL in that evolution, and, for instance, to tell us about the new approaches to paediatrics.
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: When I concluded my medical degree, no-one had told me about child development, behaviour, emotions, psychology, sociology, anthropology, everything that enables us to look at a child as a whole, namely from a clinical perspective, and place the child with his parents, namely through the neurobehavioural evaluation of the baby. What we learned at the time, using a stethoscope, a spatula, and a reflex hammer, only allowed us to have about 50% knowledge of that person. Then, there was a turning point, with the discovery of behaviour, temperament, and personality, of babies during the first hours of life, of children, adolescents, which is what allow us to know almost 100% of a person. To make that discovery with parents who are in love with their baby, who make that discovery with us, that sharing, at a decisive point of family building, is indeed a turning point, a revolution at the level of the mind and attitude. To this we called new paediatrics. A the end of the day, it is a form of paediatrics that requires the same clinical competences that a doctor is required to possess, but also a new attitude, which is: the paediatrician is not the child’s doctor, he is the doctor of the child, of the family, brothers and sisters, mother, father, grandparents, the nursery nurse, the teacher, and so on. This group, based on a relational perspective of life, makes all the difference, and this is the reason why we named it new paediatrics. Nowadays, it makes no longer sense to call it “new”. Over the years, we have noticed a few gaps. The social aspect, for instance, was not valued enough, which is why social paediatrics was created, a section of the Portuguese Paediatric Society on social paediatrics, and courses were offered in this field. This aspect has also been overcome, as social paediatrics has become part of the new paediatrics. Then we moved on to a new period, when new fields and courses were set up, such as developmental paediatrics, which was something new and crucial. It no longer makes sense these days either, since it is all part of paediatrics. Then, we did the same with regard to behavioural paediatrics. All those questions parents ask us on a daily basis, about the baby’s nutrition, sleep, playing, games, free time, are now at the core of current paediatric practice. It does not make sense to talk about behavioural paediatrics, because behaviour is inherent to paediatrics and paediatric knowledge. We overcame all of these stages, riding “from wave to wave”. This means that, nowadays, we present children to our students right in the first year of the medical degree, through the subject “Introduction to Medicine”, when we centre teaching on “being a person, being a doctor, being a patient”. And in year two we already have the subject “Introduction to Child and Family Medicine” (I gave two lectures yesterday), in year three we offer “Child Development and Education” and so on, in year four we teach Paediatrics I, followed by Paediatrics II in year five. We are the first faculty to offer child teaching and learning right through from year 1 to 6 of the degree. People may call it new paediatrics, if they so wish, but it makes no sense anymore, because it is current paediatrics. Students have several elective subjects to choose from, such as School Health and Adolescent Paediatrics, which complement, so to say, this global approach to children and their circumstances, which includes what surrounds them, what forms part of them, what we need to learn about them. This is semiology, which is the study of signs, applied to medicine, obstetrics, neurology, dermatology, etc. We need to teach about relational semiology, games semiology, behavioural semiology, bonding semiology, because this is what makes the child gradually bond to his parents throughout the first years of life.
Newsletter: Given that the motto of the subject “Introduction to Medicine” is: “know how to be yourself, know how to behave, and know what to do”, how does it translate into the teaching, research, and clinical strands?
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: It is correct as a pedagogical attitude, but the correct name is “Introduction to Clinical Practice”, which has three crucial components: “to be a person”, “to be a doctor”, and “to be a patient”. We have had professionals, psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, sports professionals, and lecturers from distinct fields of knowledge, including, amongst others, the Coach of the National Rugby Team, talking about teamwork. All I have been talking about is work one does not do alone, and I did nothing alone. I formed teams, and with those teams, I did what I felt was necessary to change. Mané, a member of our administrative staff, whose relationship with students includes laughing and crying with them, is an example of this. Her relationship with them has long extended beyond her competences as an administrative professional, and, within this new relational stance, she is like a godmother to each student, helping them, encouraging them, giving them opportunities. Accordingly, it is with these teams formed by colleagues, peers, administrative staff, students, technicians, partners, as in the case of “Introduction to Medicine”, by people who are not actually doctors but psychologists who assist us, and by Medical Education specialists, that we have been able to do all this. However, going back to your question about the motto… to be a person and to be a doctor requires teamwork, a posture, a teaching and learning approach that one can only have as part of a team. No one can do anything alone, and do it as part of team makes all the difference. For instance, look at what happened with our coach of the national rugby team: although I am not very familiar with rugby, I was aware that Portugal had a weak team, almost the last one in the world, and suddenly we had a place in the world championship! How was he able to attain this miracle? Did he use new players? No! New tactics? No! New techniques and strategies? No! He did it thanks to preparing and training the team as one. We resort to these people who come and teach our students about aspects that are vital for their lives as future doctors. They need to learn about medicine, but they also need to know that these things are also part of some innovation, particularly in medical training. Since the 1980s and 1990s, the object of paediatrics taught in year 4 – Paediatrics I - albeit in the clinical teaching strand, was normal children. You may ask me if implementing this change was easy, to which my answer is: no, it was not. Often, at meetings of the Scientific Council, and I must stress how important it was the fact I was a Full Professor, colleagues asked me: “Gomes-Pedro, you are involved in clinical education, we are training future doctors who need to know how to treat sick children, and you are teaching them about normal children?” To which I replied: “Yes, I am teaching them about normal children, because 80% of the children we examine are normal, with no pathologies, and we need to learn how to deal with children with no pathologies, with children who come with their mothers, fathers, aunts, who are concerned and anxious. We need to be able to transform that anxiety into passion, into a new framework where the child feels part of, and ensure that the family feels that, through a medical appointment, it is able to learn key issues about their child. This is something that one only learns if unblocking pathology at a key stage of learning. Of course, we have and train good doctors; in years 5 and 6, students learn about pathologies, about illnesses, about diagnosis, about therapies, and this is crucial. We need to have doctors who examine patients well, but we also need to have doctors who know how to understand a person as a whole.
Newsletter: After such a long and fruitful journey, what do you highlight, and what do you think was left undone, or could have been done differently, and what course would you like paediatrics to take in Portugal?
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: I would like to see the consolidation of what has been achieved so far, as I believe that none of this is totally guaranteed. Nowadays, paediatrics is taught from year 1 to year 6, but what if, in the future, someone decides that instead of having paediatrics taught in year 2 – we do not call it paediatrics, rather child development - or introduction to medicine in years 2 and 3, something else should be taught. However, I am convinced that this is the way to go in what, ultimately, is our responsibility. Nowadays, any citizen, regardless of being a father or a mother, needs to acknowledge that the phenomenon of change, which is the most important aspect of his life in relational terms, is to protect the rights of children. When I visited the Human Rights Committee, in Geneva, I was asked: “from that viewpoint, what are you doing for children in Portugal?” They also asked me: “As a professor, what are you doing in order to teach about children at your faculty? I replied: “That is my aim, but still have no power to do anything about it!” When I finally had the power, I made it possible to teach about children from year 1 all along to year 6. You now ask me: is this challenge won? No, it is not won! It is necessary that those in charge now guarantee the continuation of this achievement, and adopt the same coherent posture, because children are the bastions of our society. There is not a child culture in Portugal; the conditions to enable children to be happy are not encouraged in Portugal. There is still a lot to be done, and this responsibility is not paediatricians, or future doctors who will not be paediatricians, alone. It is the responsibility of all those who work at a faculty of medicine, it is the responsibility of educational agents, health agents, environmental agents, justice officers, and of all agents intervening in society. Accordingly, this is a joint and multiple task, and what I may have done is to plant some seeds that now need to be watered!
Newsletter: What is the role of the Brazelton Centre in Portugal, and what future do you envisage for it?
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: It is very important! We started with the setting up of the Brazelton Centre, which stands out for this philosophy, namely with regard to what we today call touchpoints, in the sense that there are turning points in our development, and we need to take advantage of them, such as the act of being born. Birth is not merely teaching about, or encouraging, breastfeeding, or teaching about how a baby breastfeeds, or how to change nappies. It is an entire touchpoint that is crucial in life, and that can revolutionize the lives of families. The role of the paediatrician, the role of the doctor, the nurse, the administrative technician at the obstetrics unit, or of the cleaning lady, is to foster the bonding of this baby, in terms of passion, in terms of discovery, of explosion, in terms of happiness, with the family. If this happens, that father or mother will never forget those crucial moments, which may play a significant role in their lives. Therefore, the Brazelton Centre impersonates the inspiration that we have gained to be able to act. On the basis of this, a few weeks ago, we set up the Foundation, called Brazelton/Gomes-Pedro, for Baby and Family Sciences, which, at the end of the day, will instil in society the same values found at the Faculty of Medicine and Santa Maria hospital – teaching, training, research – and the same approach, involving other professionals working with children.
Newsletter: Would you like to see one more message published at the Newsletter?
Professor Gomes-Pedro: My last message is the same one I passed on in my last lecture: life has no beginnings or ends; it has cycles that go on. My first slide at the last lecture had “last lecture” written on it, and the last slide showed the words “first lecture of a new cycle”. Each one of us, no matter how old we are, has a new cycle ahead, and we need to take advantage of these cycles to do what we believe is our responsibility to do, and to act upon it. This involves us all. I insist on my previous message, no one does anything alone, and I did nothing alone. What I have done, I have done as part of a team and with everyone. It is to all the people who worked with me that I would like to leave a message, an embrace of gratitude, courage, and strength to encourage them to continue to follow the same path, and do together what, at the end of the day, is the immense task of what still needs to be accomplished.»
Given that human beings are the image of the institutions they represent, the Newsletter of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Lisbon could not miss the opportunity to mark the retirement of such a prominent figure – as a man, professor, and doctor –, Professor João Gomes-Pedro, who made a point of stressing that this is but the beginning of a new cycle.
Newsletter: Professor Gomes-Pedro, before we continue, we would like to thank you for your availability. It gives us great pleasure to be able to publish an interview with you on the occasion of your retirement. We would like to know how you view yourself as a person, professor, and as doctor, and how you did manage to combine these three facets throughout your life.
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: I thank you for this honour. In a nutshell, when you ask me to define myself, I will always say that I see myself as an academic. What does this mean? An academic is someone who is demanding with regard to knowledge, with regard to others (students, colleagues, peers, representatives of the civil society, etc.) and who is responsible for change. An academic has the moral duty to bring about change, in a proactive and positive sense, with regard to what he perceives as being gaps or as turning point opportunities towards the goal one intends to meet. If you ask me to describe myself as an academic (as long as I live, I will be an academic: an academic does not retire, he may, at best, become an emeritus professor), I wanted to be an academic with a responsibility for change. And I have been involved in several changes at the university. If I were to turn back, I would do the same things again. Many things would not occur in the same way, but I would follow the same ideal, and I would try again to accomplish a constructive and significant change in the life of the university, and, more precisely, in the life of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Lisbon.
Newsletter: In what concerns the changes you mentioned, which would you highlight?
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: As an academic, I have always privileged three areas: research, teaching, and clinical practice. I see myself as a doctor, as a paediatrician, but a clinical person who does not teach and carry out research is someone with “broken legs”. With regard to the very pertinent question about my involvement in change, I would say that it was only after twenty-five years as a doctor, researcher, and lecturer, that I realised that I could only aim to get some of those changes to the end-recipients if I got involved in education. To implement change without involving educational strategies is to work in vain. My involvement in education started with the work of Professor Carlos Ribeiro. I participated actively in the GEPOG (Office for Postgraduate Studies of FMUL), and subsequently, thanks to the proactive and intelligent work of Professor Torres Pereira, I became the Director of DEM (Department for Medical Education). This was like a breath of fresh air, so to speak, for this Faculty, as over fifty lecturers undertook medical training. In this first investment in education, I did not deal with paediatric medical education, but with inclusive medical education, and we embarked on several types of reform at the Faculty of Medicine of Lisbon, of which I would highlight the planning and preparation of the Master Degree in Medical Education. We offered two Master Degrees in Medical Education, training about fifty lecturers, some of them full professors, who became master degree students despite being full professors already, and we trained these fifty lecturers, who were subsequently able to implement change at their respective departments, clinics, and institutes. This intervention, first at GEPOG, then at DEM, was preceded by something else in my capacity as president of the Pedagogical Council. I organised a meeting with practically all full professors and senior associate lecturers of FMUL. As students, and with two professors of medical education from the Sorbonne, we spent three days at a hotel in Sesimbra working night and day on the changes that were necessary to put into practice. This was due to the fact that the strategies required to enforce the necessary change in departments and in each sector of the university life of FMUL could only succeed if we had an educational methodology and intervention, and resorted to competences acquired through education. This was one of the things that did work out. Much of current reform, and of reform carried out at that time (or attempts to reform), took place then. For instance, setting up the Institute of Introduction to Medicine and corresponding subject, a turning point in medical education strategy, dates from that period. Our first year students started to undergo traineeships and carry out educational visits to social centres, prisons, crèches, immigrant centres, centres for the support of some ethnic groups, such as the gypsy community, which meant that our future doctors were able to experience society as it really was, and this was fundamental. It was not possible to have a complete turn-around, but, at the same time the length of the medical degree was shortened, it constituted a crucial opportunity to humanize the training of medical students. However, I would say that it was necessary to acknowledge the absence of an educational structure and of an educational competence, which made us spend around twelve years of our university life leading the department of medical education of the Faculty, to make us try to implement reform at that time. This had a direct impact, such as the Introduction to Medicine subject, and, later on, it had a significant “knock-on-effect” on the distinct areas of activity at our Faculty.
Newsletter: As you followed up the evolution of Paediatrics in Portugal, where you played a major role, which stages would you like to highlight? We would like you to describe the role of FMUL in that evolution, and, for instance, to tell us about the new approaches to paediatrics.
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: When I concluded my medical degree, no-one had told me about child development, behaviour, emotions, psychology, sociology, anthropology, everything that enables us to look at a child as a whole, namely from a clinical perspective, and place the child with his parents, namely through the neurobehavioural evaluation of the baby. What we learned at the time, using a stethoscope, a spatula, and a reflex hammer, only allowed us to have about 50% knowledge of that person. Then, there was a turning point, with the discovery of behaviour, temperament, and personality, of babies during the first hours of life, of children, adolescents, which is what allow us to know almost 100% of a person. To make that discovery with parents who are in love with their baby, who make that discovery with us, that sharing, at a decisive point of family building, is indeed a turning point, a revolution at the level of the mind and attitude. To this we called new paediatrics. A the end of the day, it is a form of paediatrics that requires the same clinical competences that a doctor is required to possess, but also a new attitude, which is: the paediatrician is not the child’s doctor, he is the doctor of the child, of the family, brothers and sisters, mother, father, grandparents, the nursery nurse, the teacher, and so on. This group, based on a relational perspective of life, makes all the difference, and this is the reason why we named it new paediatrics. Nowadays, it makes no longer sense to call it “new”. Over the years, we have noticed a few gaps. The social aspect, for instance, was not valued enough, which is why social paediatrics was created, a section of the Portuguese Paediatric Society on social paediatrics, and courses were offered in this field. This aspect has also been overcome, as social paediatrics has become part of the new paediatrics. Then we moved on to a new period, when new fields and courses were set up, such as developmental paediatrics, which was something new and crucial. It no longer makes sense these days either, since it is all part of paediatrics. Then, we did the same with regard to behavioural paediatrics. All those questions parents ask us on a daily basis, about the baby’s nutrition, sleep, playing, games, free time, are now at the core of current paediatric practice. It does not make sense to talk about behavioural paediatrics, because behaviour is inherent to paediatrics and paediatric knowledge. We overcame all of these stages, riding “from wave to wave”. This means that, nowadays, we present children to our students right in the first year of the medical degree, through the subject “Introduction to Medicine”, when we centre teaching on “being a person, being a doctor, being a patient”. And in year two we already have the subject “Introduction to Child and Family Medicine” (I gave two lectures yesterday), in year three we offer “Child Development and Education” and so on, in year four we teach Paediatrics I, followed by Paediatrics II in year five. We are the first faculty to offer child teaching and learning right through from year 1 to 6 of the degree. People may call it new paediatrics, if they so wish, but it makes no sense anymore, because it is current paediatrics. Students have several elective subjects to choose from, such as School Health and Adolescent Paediatrics, which complement, so to say, this global approach to children and their circumstances, which includes what surrounds them, what forms part of them, what we need to learn about them. This is semiology, which is the study of signs, applied to medicine, obstetrics, neurology, dermatology, etc. We need to teach about relational semiology, games semiology, behavioural semiology, bonding semiology, because this is what makes the child gradually bond to his parents throughout the first years of life.
Newsletter: Given that the motto of the subject “Introduction to Medicine” is: “know how to be yourself, know how to behave, and know what to do”, how does it translate into the teaching, research, and clinical strands?
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: It is correct as a pedagogical attitude, but the correct name is “Introduction to Clinical Practice”, which has three crucial components: “to be a person”, “to be a doctor”, and “to be a patient”. We have had professionals, psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, sports professionals, and lecturers from distinct fields of knowledge, including, amongst others, the Coach of the National Rugby Team, talking about teamwork. All I have been talking about is work one does not do alone, and I did nothing alone. I formed teams, and with those teams, I did what I felt was necessary to change. Mané, a member of our administrative staff, whose relationship with students includes laughing and crying with them, is an example of this. Her relationship with them has long extended beyond her competences as an administrative professional, and, within this new relational stance, she is like a godmother to each student, helping them, encouraging them, giving them opportunities. Accordingly, it is with these teams formed by colleagues, peers, administrative staff, students, technicians, partners, as in the case of “Introduction to Medicine”, by people who are not actually doctors but psychologists who assist us, and by Medical Education specialists, that we have been able to do all this. However, going back to your question about the motto… to be a person and to be a doctor requires teamwork, a posture, a teaching and learning approach that one can only have as part of a team. No one can do anything alone, and do it as part of team makes all the difference. For instance, look at what happened with our coach of the national rugby team: although I am not very familiar with rugby, I was aware that Portugal had a weak team, almost the last one in the world, and suddenly we had a place in the world championship! How was he able to attain this miracle? Did he use new players? No! New tactics? No! New techniques and strategies? No! He did it thanks to preparing and training the team as one. We resort to these people who come and teach our students about aspects that are vital for their lives as future doctors. They need to learn about medicine, but they also need to know that these things are also part of some innovation, particularly in medical training. Since the 1980s and 1990s, the object of paediatrics taught in year 4 – Paediatrics I - albeit in the clinical teaching strand, was normal children. You may ask me if implementing this change was easy, to which my answer is: no, it was not. Often, at meetings of the Scientific Council, and I must stress how important it was the fact I was a Full Professor, colleagues asked me: “Gomes-Pedro, you are involved in clinical education, we are training future doctors who need to know how to treat sick children, and you are teaching them about normal children?” To which I replied: “Yes, I am teaching them about normal children, because 80% of the children we examine are normal, with no pathologies, and we need to learn how to deal with children with no pathologies, with children who come with their mothers, fathers, aunts, who are concerned and anxious. We need to be able to transform that anxiety into passion, into a new framework where the child feels part of, and ensure that the family feels that, through a medical appointment, it is able to learn key issues about their child. This is something that one only learns if unblocking pathology at a key stage of learning. Of course, we have and train good doctors; in years 5 and 6, students learn about pathologies, about illnesses, about diagnosis, about therapies, and this is crucial. We need to have doctors who examine patients well, but we also need to have doctors who know how to understand a person as a whole.
Newsletter: After such a long and fruitful journey, what do you highlight, and what do you think was left undone, or could have been done differently, and what course would you like paediatrics to take in Portugal?
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: I would like to see the consolidation of what has been achieved so far, as I believe that none of this is totally guaranteed. Nowadays, paediatrics is taught from year 1 to year 6, but what if, in the future, someone decides that instead of having paediatrics taught in year 2 – we do not call it paediatrics, rather child development - or introduction to medicine in years 2 and 3, something else should be taught. However, I am convinced that this is the way to go in what, ultimately, is our responsibility. Nowadays, any citizen, regardless of being a father or a mother, needs to acknowledge that the phenomenon of change, which is the most important aspect of his life in relational terms, is to protect the rights of children. When I visited the Human Rights Committee, in Geneva, I was asked: “from that viewpoint, what are you doing for children in Portugal?” They also asked me: “As a professor, what are you doing in order to teach about children at your faculty? I replied: “That is my aim, but still have no power to do anything about it!” When I finally had the power, I made it possible to teach about children from year 1 all along to year 6. You now ask me: is this challenge won? No, it is not won! It is necessary that those in charge now guarantee the continuation of this achievement, and adopt the same coherent posture, because children are the bastions of our society. There is not a child culture in Portugal; the conditions to enable children to be happy are not encouraged in Portugal. There is still a lot to be done, and this responsibility is not paediatricians, or future doctors who will not be paediatricians, alone. It is the responsibility of all those who work at a faculty of medicine, it is the responsibility of educational agents, health agents, environmental agents, justice officers, and of all agents intervening in society. Accordingly, this is a joint and multiple task, and what I may have done is to plant some seeds that now need to be watered!
Newsletter: What is the role of the Brazelton Centre in Portugal, and what future do you envisage for it?
Prof. Gomes-Pedro: It is very important! We started with the setting up of the Brazelton Centre, which stands out for this philosophy, namely with regard to what we today call touchpoints, in the sense that there are turning points in our development, and we need to take advantage of them, such as the act of being born. Birth is not merely teaching about, or encouraging, breastfeeding, or teaching about how a baby breastfeeds, or how to change nappies. It is an entire touchpoint that is crucial in life, and that can revolutionize the lives of families. The role of the paediatrician, the role of the doctor, the nurse, the administrative technician at the obstetrics unit, or of the cleaning lady, is to foster the bonding of this baby, in terms of passion, in terms of discovery, of explosion, in terms of happiness, with the family. If this happens, that father or mother will never forget those crucial moments, which may play a significant role in their lives. Therefore, the Brazelton Centre impersonates the inspiration that we have gained to be able to act. On the basis of this, a few weeks ago, we set up the Foundation, called Brazelton/Gomes-Pedro, for Baby and Family Sciences, which, at the end of the day, will instil in society the same values found at the Faculty of Medicine and Santa Maria hospital – teaching, training, research – and the same approach, involving other professionals working with children.
Newsletter: Would you like to see one more message published at the Newsletter?
Professor Gomes-Pedro: My last message is the same one I passed on in my last lecture: life has no beginnings or ends; it has cycles that go on. My first slide at the last lecture had “last lecture” written on it, and the last slide showed the words “first lecture of a new cycle”. Each one of us, no matter how old we are, has a new cycle ahead, and we need to take advantage of these cycles to do what we believe is our responsibility to do, and to act upon it. This involves us all. I insist on my previous message, no one does anything alone, and I did nothing alone. What I have done, I have done as part of a team and with everyone. It is to all the people who worked with me that I would like to leave a message, an embrace of gratitude, courage, and strength to encourage them to continue to follow the same path, and do together what, at the end of the day, is the immense task of what still needs to be accomplished.»