Dec 16, 2015
treat the victim or terrorist first?
What do you think is the right policy?
Until now, medical teams responding to a terrorist attack would treat victims first and only after that treat the terrorist.
Due to an appeal by the Physicians for Human Rights, the Ethics Bureau has decided to make the Medical Association change its policy.
Now, according to the new policy, medical teams will have to treat the worst injured first, no matter who it is, including the terrorist.
source: Jewish Press
So, what do you think?
I understand that it is difficult to put the decision in the hands of a EMT, and different EMTs or paramedics or doctors might make different decisions as to who should be treated first, if the decision is up to them. The medical teams should only be concerned with medicine, and not trying to figure out who did what and were they right or wrong, justified or not.
On the other hand, the terrorist should not be given priority over his victim. No matter how badly injured he is. No victim should have to wait for treatment because the terrorist is taking up the resources of the medical team.
After the victims are treated - sure, then treat the terrorist. But not before.
I think I lean towards the old policy, that of treating the victims first, though I do see the difficulty in having a medical official make a decision to not treat someone for moral reasons.
What do you think?
Until now, medical teams responding to a terrorist attack would treat victims first and only after that treat the terrorist.
Due to an appeal by the Physicians for Human Rights, the Ethics Bureau has decided to make the Medical Association change its policy.
Now, according to the new policy, medical teams will have to treat the worst injured first, no matter who it is, including the terrorist.
source: Jewish Press
So, what do you think?
I understand that it is difficult to put the decision in the hands of a EMT, and different EMTs or paramedics or doctors might make different decisions as to who should be treated first, if the decision is up to them. The medical teams should only be concerned with medicine, and not trying to figure out who did what and were they right or wrong, justified or not.
On the other hand, the terrorist should not be given priority over his victim. No matter how badly injured he is. No victim should have to wait for treatment because the terrorist is taking up the resources of the medical team.
After the victims are treated - sure, then treat the terrorist. But not before.
I think I lean towards the old policy, that of treating the victims first, though I do see the difficulty in having a medical official make a decision to not treat someone for moral reasons.
What do you think?
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Related Posts
Of course, Torah means nothing to them, but what the inhuman humane societies think seem to matter.
ReplyDeleteAs I once emailed you, Rafi, in light of the new policy, Rav Yitzchak Brand Shlit"a paskens to kill a subdued terrorist. This is because if they are going to treat the terrorist before the Jewish victim, the added wait time will end up threatening the life of the Jewish victim. He therefore paskens that you may kill a subdued terrorist.
ReplyDeleteThis is the epitome of ...כל המרחם על אכזרים.
There was no "old policy" - I believe it was posted on Muqata back in October that MADA confirmed their policy is triage, to which Zaka responded that their policy is victims first (which maybe they can do as a private organization?).
ReplyDeleteAnd for the most part this policy isn't that significant because before a terrorist can be approached for treatment, the police must disarm him - check him for hidden explosives, etc. So there is almost always a delay in treating the terrorist.
Which means if a there are several victims ch"v and the terrorist is still alive, and only one ambulance responds, chances are it will take care of the most urgent victim while the police are still handling the terrorist. At some point hopefully there are more medics to treat everyone so no anti-victim triage is necessary.
But yes it's ridiculous that there should be such a policy for "political correctness" - we are certainly killing ourselves that way.
What unbelievably warped logic. If you know he's the terrorist, don't treat him until you've dealt with all his victims. הרצחת וגם ירשת
ReplyDeleteNo matter who transports them, whether it's Zaka or Magen David Adom, the hospital will devote the most resources to and first treat whoever is most seriously wounded, regardless of who that happens to be.
ReplyDeleteIt all depends on the policy. If this policy is being extended to the battlefield as well (for example after a firefight in Lebanon or in Gaza). Because the Palestinians have chosen the streets of Israeli cities to be the battlefield.
ReplyDelete1st -by performing triage - treating most injured first, the goal is to save more people - not one over the other, but save the life of one about to die and then help someone less injured.
ReplyDelete2nd - how do you know who is a terrorist and who isn't? A gaurd shot a jew, and a jew stabbed a jew, a mob killed a jew - hinking the other was a terrorist
3rd - how do you know it's not a mentally ill person - was the orthodox guy who stabbed people at a gay pride a terrorist or crazy?
4th - how do you know there aren't mitigating circumstances, an attacker who is maybe acting under duress, threats of violence against family or other?
5th - Israel isn't north korea or saudi arabia, we pride ourselves on being in the oecd and being a deomcracy (even though not quite) because we pride ourselves on being in the group of nations that are enlightened - if you want a torah true society and turn israel into a theocracy, you better hope you don't get what you wish for because what you imagine is not the truth.
6th, how do you expect emts to make these decisions?
The. Origin of such a policy is cause the 'other sides' ambulances will do the same.
ReplyDeleteBut wr know they don't. (In fact, their ambulances have been caught participating.