IMHO, Doctors have a duty of care to whomever is their patient. I don’t care whether that person is the second coming of Christ or the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler, they are entitled to effective care.
That’s not to say that they can’t be tried for their crimes, but the administration of justice is a different job from the administration of medicine.
Physicians are not judges. Their duty is to save lives, no matter how evil or good said life is.
Because a living terrorist can pay for its crimes, and may one day understand the evil of his way, no matter how slim the chances are.
A dead one won’t. Even worse, it can become a martyr to his people and encourage others to follow his path.
Once they are fit to be incarcerated and judged they will. But for now they are a life that can be saved. That’s all that matters for a physician.
You are right. It isn’t universal, nor is it a law in many countries. Still, it is an oath that many take, and this is why they won’t refuse to treat anyone, even their enemies.
The relevant part, albeit not part of the original oath, can be summarized as “help, or do not harm”. And not helping a wounded person when you could is considered by many of their peers as harm by inaction.
Of course you won’t chastise them for breaking their oath, you don’t have the power to do anything anyway, but their peers will, and it is almost impossible to find work in this field once you are identified as an oath breaker.
On the other hand, there can be some triage during such an event, and if the hospital is too full, guess who will probably not get priority over their victims?
IMHO, Doctors have a duty of care to whomever is their patient. I don’t care whether that person is the second coming of Christ or the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler, they are entitled to effective care.
That’s not to say that they can’t be tried for their crimes, but the administration of justice is a different job from the administration of medicine.
That’s cool that you think that, but it’s far from a universal truth.
I believe it should be. A lot can be gleaned about a society’s morals & ethics from how it treats its criminals (and arguably crime in general).
I don’t necessarily agree, but I get your point.
Do you know about the Hippocratic Oath ?
Physicians are not judges. Their duty is to save lives, no matter how evil or good said life is.
Because a living terrorist can pay for its crimes, and may one day understand the evil of his way, no matter how slim the chances are.
A dead one won’t. Even worse, it can become a martyr to his people and encourage others to follow his path.
Once they are fit to be incarcerated and judged they will. But for now they are a life that can be saved. That’s all that matters for a physician.
Yes. The hippocratic oath is not universal law.
Doctors are free to break it, and I will not chastise them for doing so in the case of their enemies.
You are right. It isn’t universal, nor is it a law in many countries. Still, it is an oath that many take, and this is why they won’t refuse to treat anyone, even their enemies.
The relevant part, albeit not part of the original oath, can be summarized as “help, or do not harm”. And not helping a wounded person when you could is considered by many of their peers as harm by inaction.
Of course you won’t chastise them for breaking their oath, you don’t have the power to do anything anyway, but their peers will, and it is almost impossible to find work in this field once you are identified as an oath breaker.
On the other hand, there can be some triage during such an event, and if the hospital is too full, guess who will probably not get priority over their victims?