A Doctor's Choice

[freewilly]

If you were a doctor and a murderer/rapist/pedophile was brought into your hospital emergency room nedding emergency surgery would you refuse that person treatment?

 

[butterfoot]

If you were a doctor and a murderer/rapist/pedophile was brought into your hospital emergency room nedding emergency surgery would you refuse that person treatment?

So your asking if we should treat based on actions. I don't think you can make that judgement. What I know about doctors is that it is to save life first no matter why they are there or what there past is/was.

-cw

 

[Verv]

If you were a doctor and a murderer/rapist/pedophile was brought into your hospital emergency room nedding emergency surgery would you refuse that person treatment?

He who has not sinned may cast the first stone, truly.

I feel that what we should do is try to forgive men of their sins, for it is easy for us to destroy a man's life when understanding might be in line for them. Yes, it is very inflammatory to say that we should understand a murderer, but in our hearts have we not desired to murder at times? In our hearts, can we say that if we were in a different set of circumstances we would not have turned out to be similar?

St. Paul was a murderer.

St. Augustine was a womanizer.

I have actually met people who, though they are very good men, made the mistake of trying to force themselves on a woman while intoxicated. It can happen to good people -- and certainly, if someone was raised very poorly, they might do such an action.

Do not take this as an advocacy that we should do away with jails, but rather, take this as we should emphasize rehabilitation.

Jesus Christ taught us to specifically love our enemies.

Dalai Lama teaches something similar -- when he was asked how he feels about the Chinese Communists that invaded and destroyed his land, he noted that, whereas many people feel anger and hatred towards the murders of monks and nuns, rather, he feels a profound sympathy for the Chinese -- why?

He understands that it is not the monks and the nuns who suffer, but it is the killers who suffer: they are doomed to a life of agony and unhappiness, having to live in this life and the afterlife with the knowledge and reality of the terrible crimes that they have committed.

A normal man loves his friends and family and hates his enemies. A truly Holy man loves both.

 

[Ampoliros]

If you were a doctor and a murderer/rapist/pedophile was brought into your hospital emergency room nedding emergency surgery would you refuse that person treatment?

No, I would treat them. It is not my place to make moral decisions in regard to a person and simply deny them treatment because of it.

 

[jayem]

If you were a doctor and a murderer/rapist/pedophile was brought into your hospital emergency room nedding emergency surgery would you refuse that person treatment?

I do work in health care, and the short answer is no. But a provider's duty to treat is not absolute. There is no obligation to provide care which, in one's good faith judgement, is not medically indicated or may result in more risk than benefit. (Like a patient who asked for 100 Oxycontin tablets for a sprained ankle.) And one is not required to perform any procedure which violates one's personal moral standards, i.e., abortion, or withdrawal of life support. Though one should be willing to refer such patients to the appropriate provider.

 

[tocis]

If you were a doctor and a murderer/rapist/pedophile was brought into your hospital emergency room nedding emergency surgery would you refuse that person treatment?

I'll be honest and admit that I'll surely be tempted to refuse him help... or maybe making an "accidental" lethal mistake.
Whether I'd give in to that temptation is another question. I wouldn't have the right to decide who lives and who dies after all... as a doctor it should be my duty to help people, not "non-criminals" or "believers" or "pure-blooded aryans" or whathaveyou. And somehow I believe that laws should be followed (unless it's perfectly guaranteed that breaking one won't harm anyone, like ignoring the red traffic light when you are definitely the only one at the crossroads for hundreds of yards all around. That still wouldn't be "right", but I'd consider such a thing to be "tolerable").

 

[Chrysalis Kat]

(Like a patient who asked for 100 Oxycontin tablets for a sprained ankle.) And one is not required to perform any procedure which violates one's personal moral standards, i.e., abortion, or withdrawal of life support. Though one should be willing to refer such patients to the appropriate provider.

I'd love a referral to a doctor that would give me 100 Oxy's for sprained ankle!

 

[britishtankgirl]

hmm..... if this was a life or death situation surely it would be better to treat them, than they were to die and be judge, least this way theyd have the chance to realise they had done wrong, even seek forgivness. i would allways choose life for somebody rather than death, gives God more oppertunity to work in their life.

 

[The-Doctor]

To answer your question I would not refuse to treat someone because of who they were or what they have done.

 

[bethinker]

Jesus himself, never refused to treat someone because of his/her past.