Obesity is characterized by being a chronic disease deriving from the accumulation of excessive fat, used by the body as an energy reserve. It is determined by body mass index and, according to data collected from the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), there are over a billion obese people worldwide, of all age groups. Despite the high number, the fat body became the target of prejudice, directly reaching the self-image of the obese in a negative way. The demand for the "ideal body" has intensified, and with this situation, there has been a gradual growth by medical specialists. The lack of sensitivity of the professional in question allows discriminatory acts to occur in medical consultations. It is also observed the increase in mobilizations to combat obesity, where the fat person has the obligation to lose weight, discussing serious topics such as obesity and fat phobia, overcoming this theme. Thinking about it, this article sought to analyze how the management of care with obese people occurs and verify the ability of the newly graduated physician to conduct with empathy and professionalism the care of obese patients, preserving moral integrity, physical health and mental illness of the patient in the face of fat phobia. Thus, it was verified that the practice of medical fat phobia occurs in three categories being in the professional relationship in the infrastructure and in the diagnosis and treatment. It is of a lot of importance to stimulate doctor-patient empathy, as it encompasses the emotional, ethical, intellectual and behavioral, in addition to fostering relationship, trust and respect, generating a reciprocal connection that allows benefits, such as improvement and satisfaction in the results of the health treatments of this patient, being an essential conduct for the therapeutic plan.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.