Military Medical Ethics



Military Medical Ethics

Introduction

The work has the purpose to relate to medical ethics and practice of military medicine in situations of armed conflict. It discusses the decision-making process of ethical issues that arise in times of war in military medicine. On one side the doctor is committed to his patients and, therefore, their right to beneficence, non-malfeasance, confidentiality, and self-determination. And secondly, by also being military, is subjected to the control and compromised with certain military objectives fashion chain. The subject is approached by different ethical currents, including the ethics, the principlism, virtue ethics and utilitarianism. Some authors, with a deontologist absolute bias allege inconsistency between being a doctor and accept to serve in military ranks, because it would be unable to defend the interests of the patient under their care. At the other extreme, there are those who argue that state interests outweigh the individual interests and medical as any other citizen should participate in the war effort, even if it means participating in the development of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and even, in extreme cases , torturing, if it is to save the lives of many.

Obviously, in the context of war, expect the doctor has only one based in principlism or virtue ethics and medicine traditionally known in peacetime conduct, something unlikely (Gross, 2013). Also seek rules that can be universalized and view the patient only as an end in itself, forgetting that it is also combatant therefore has an instrumental value on the battlefield, something naive. But consider it only as a means to an end, something wicked. In conclusion, the influence of utilitarian current in medical management can only be permitted in extraordinary situations such as war and with caveats: the inviolability of non-malfeasance of the medical profession.

Discussion

Ethics Abandoned

An independent study, called "Ethics Abandoned", revealed on Tuesday (5) that U.S. military medical personnel participated in torture at Guantanamo and other CIA prisons, violating ethical codes of the profession. According to the survey, doctors and psychologists "contained, participated and allowed torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners." The Open Society Foundation of George Soros, who led the study also states that, besides participating in torture, the medical group was involved in the design practices of terrorism suspects who occupied CIA prisons in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and Afghanistan said the report. Pentagon and CIA, however, deny the charges, saying that the report contains inaccuracies and errors.

The study discusses various practices of coercion and torture, but focuses on the force-feeding of prisoners on hunger strike and also the violent interrogation methods like simulated drowning (water boarding) in secret detention centers. "It is clear from research that, in the name of national security, the military ignored the code of ethics of health professionals. They began to function as agents of the military, practicing acts contrary to the rule and ethics "international force and the U.S.," said co-author Gerald Thomson, Emeritus Professor of Medicine at Columbia University, USA.

"The doctors, nurses, psychologists and other personnel assigned to ...