What would you do?

[sister_islam]

These are the kind of ethical dilemmas medicine has to deal with every day.

If the moral decision is supposed to be for 'the greater good', then paying one life for the sake of many doesn't seem so much of a sacrifice, does it?
However, that looks very different from the perspective of the person who holds the cure, and his family and loved ones ...

Those a tough decisions to make - and perhaps there is no right or wrong ...

that's exactly what my teacher was trying to cover. its become a moral/ethnical dilemma that we have to chose from right to wrong or maybe the other way round too- from a bad to a good. Its hard to mke a decision.

i mean when my friends was arguing with me because they didnt agree of kill this one person to save a large number because it your actions that accounts for...maybe for religious or because its personal...

do u understand wat i'm trying to say here?

 

[sister_islam]

of course.

oops.

i v been over thinking. haha

Yeah, i know its a scenario.

No no its okay...maybe because u have a different view like me ....i have a personal argument...maybe u have a religious argument...

 

[جوري]

I am so surprised that many answer a question based on a fantasy..
in fact doctors don't have to answer such a 'difficult dilemma' as some suggest, the first law of medical ethics as well what your oath as you receive your diploma is 'Primum non nocere'

first, do no harm-- that is if I am to forgo the impossibility of the premise proposed here!

 

[glo]

that's exactly what my teacher was trying to cover. its become a moral/ethical dilemma that we have to chose from right to wrong or maybe the other way round too- from a bad to a good. Its hard to make a decision.

i mean when my friends was arguing with me because they didnt agree of kill this one person to save a large number because it your actions that accounts for...maybe for religious or because its personal...

do u understand wat i'm trying to say here?

I know what you mean.
It is incredibly difficult to make such decisions.

Such decisions also change over time - as societal views and opinions change.

It also depends on our own emotional involvement.
In the circumstances you describe, you might find it reasonable to sacrifice the life of one stranger ... but would you still agree if it was your child/parent/sibling?

I find moral and ethical debates fascinating, because they challenge our own thinking and values to the core ...

I rarely come away with a clear answer. (I struggle with deciding on which shampoo to choose in the shop, let alone which moral decision is the best! )

 

[sister_islam]

I am so surprised that many answer a question based on a fantasy..
in fact doctors don't have to answer such a 'difficult dilemma' as some suggest, the first law of medical ethics as well what your oath as you receive your diploma is 'Primum non nocere'

first, do no harm-- that is if I am to forgo the impossibility of the premise proposed here!

Yes i no dat this is based on fantasy but is it wrong to think like this? but u got to remember anything is possible

 

[Tony]

I am so surprised that many answer a question based on a fantasy..
in fact doctors don't have to answer such a 'difficult dilemma' as some suggest, the first law of medical ethics as well what your oath as you receive your diploma is 'Primum non nocere'

first, do no harm-- that is if I am to forgo the impossibility of the premise proposed here!

start us off with a thread posing an ethical dilema then m'ladyplease

 

[glo]

first, do no harm-- that is if I am to forgo the impossibility of the premise proposed here!

That's the flip argument to 'Do what offer the best outcome for most people'.

Do you think that from medical perspective killing one person (as described in the imagined scenario) for the sake of many would be completely unthinkable?
Would medicine look for alternative solutions instead?

 

[catalzzy]

That's the flip argument to 'Do what offer the best outcome for most people

is that a similarity to utilitarianism?

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum
Leave it. Killing is a major sin, so even if it is for the purpose of helping others, we still aren't allowed to. As for the cancer-patients, Allah subhana wa ta'ala will give them a way out if he want them to live longer.

 

[جوري]

That's the flip argument to 'Do what offer the best outcome for most people'.

Do you think that from medical perspective killing one person (as described in the imagined scenario) for the sake of many would be completely unthinkable?
Would medicine look for alternative solutions instead?

Yes, unthinkable!..
that is why Medical ethics is a course taught in all medical schools, so you don't have random thoughts as new situations arise, the law is already set. First do no harm and patient autonomy are about the golden rules here.. now that is if I am to accept the premise of the Q which I don't.. and because of these medical ethics, is everyone entitled to health care, rich, poor, black white, even criminals... you are not judge or executioner here -- you are to do what you have taken an oath to do, which is preserve life not end it.. why do you think medical euthanasia is a crime in all states except Oregon where it not an actual breech of such laws?

 

[sister_islam]

It also depends on our own emotional involvement.
In the circumstances you describe, you might find it reasonable to sacrifice the life of one stranger ... but would you still agree if it was your child/parent/sibling?

then our values, decisions change doesnt it? but what if (god forbid) one of you family members has cancer...you realli want a quick treatment and this is a chance. You dont want to find out tha the illness that u have has a cure and no ones doing anything about it


I find moral and ethical debates fascinating, because they challenge our own thinking and values to the core ...


so do i!! i luv this!!

I rarely come away with a clear answer. (I struggle with deciding on which shampoo to choose in the shop, let alone which moral decision is the best! )

join the club!!!:laugh:

 

[glo]

Skye, but for a medic it must be excruciating to have a medical solution so close at hand, and yet be unable to utilise it ...

 

[glo]

I am really enjoying this thread.

I'm logging off now, but you guys keep it up!
I will follow you up in the morning.

 

[Tony]

^^ gdnight

 

[sister_islam]

I am really enjoying this thread.

I'm logging off now, but you guys keep it up!
I will follow you up in the morning.

thank u xxx

 

[جوري]

Yes i no dat this is based on fantasy but is it wrong to think like this? but u got to remember anything is possible

No, some things are impossible!
flying watermelons, pink unicorns, living to be 2000 yrs of age etc.
they defy the laws of our known universe, thus, some things I wouldn't at all consider since they have no basis in reality.. if I base my opinion on fantasy, then how about I fantasize about a world with no cancer all together? why rob a man or a woman of 6 liters of blood when I can get away with 3 liters and put in central venous access and infuse him from the other side if in fact I am looking for just a particular component that is a 'cure all'. knowing what I know, it is impossible to think that this would be possible.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

The question is by way of fantasy, it is illogical..

It's a thought experiment. You're not supposed to take it literally.

Questions like this help to explore the causes and consequences of hypotheses or beliefs that we have. Glo sums it up very well:

If the moral decision is supposed to be for 'the greater good', then paying one life for the sake of many doesn't seem so much of a sacrifice, does it?
However, that looks very different from the perspective of the person who holds the cure, and his family and loved ones ...

Those a tough decisions to make - and perhaps there is no right or wrong ...

Is the life of an individual as valuable as the lives of many?

The Jewish Mishnah seems to think so:

For this reason, man [i.e. the first human being] was created alone to teach that whoever destroys a single life is as though he had destroyed an entire universe, and whoever saves a single life is as if he had saved an entire universe. (Sanhedrin 4: 5)

As does the Qur'an:

YUSUFALI: On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (Qur'an 5:32)

The possibility of prolonging the lives of many is certainly tempting. But should we be artificially prolonging life? Or should we just let nature take its course?

These are questions that we all need to think about, and no-one can say definitively that they have the right answers to them.

Peace

 

[جوري]

Skye, but for a medic it must be excruciating to have a medical solution so close at hand, and yet be unable to utilise it ...

No, it isn't. following medical ethics is as important as practicing medicine. You can't let go of one for the sake of the others.. those who do are outcasts and shunned by the rest of the medical community and in all likely-hood lose their license and end up in jail.. again your job is to preserve life not take it away...

for more on the matter, you may purchase:


Medical Ethics: Accounts of the Cases that Shaped and Define Medical Ethics by Gregory Pence (Paperback - Jul 11, 2007)

Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping.

if anything outside of that it will not be decided by a doctor but by a court of law!

all the best

 

[جوري]

Greetings,


It's a thought experiment. You're not supposed to take it literally.

Then I have already answered that the first law in practicing medicine is: ''Primum non nocere"-- supposedly goes back to Hippocrates though I have my doubts.. nonetheless, it makes the situation crystal, whether literal or not!

We are not here to play God, decide who lives and who dies for a perceived notion of greater good -- we are here to preserve life, and if we can't by our scientific means available, then to provide comfort and supportive care..

 

[sister_islam]

Greetings,


Or should we just let nature take its course?

Peace

If we do let nature takes its course, its like not to anything...i mean if we did let nature takes its course, then why are all the docs, nurses and all other health professionsa bothering or is it our prinicples, values that get in the way of things? is it good that we're helping others or shall we stick to the nature?
?