Medical ethics

[Theunicornhunter 2]

I didn't catch the name of the ep but I recently watched the episode of VOY where B'Elanna is attacked by the reptile looking creature and the Doctor creates a Cardassian hologram to help him.

 

The Cardassian is later discovered to be a war criminal and B'Elanna refuses his treatment. Her feeling was that to use knowledge he'd gained through his abuse of his victimes would be to encourage further atrocity - Tom off course wants to do anything to keep her alive.

 

The Captain ultimately took responsibility for the decision.

 

If it were my own life I'm not sure what I'd do but I know if it were the life of a child and I knew the knowledge was available to save him I'd use what was available. I also think that if I had been a victim I wouldn't want a child to die if something learned from my suffering could save him.

 

What would you do?

[MrPsychic 1]

My ancestry is one of Jewish leading back to Poland, so I can see myself in this episode. I don't know what I would do, I guess I wouldn't take the medical care of a former Nazi doctor who experimented on Jews. I would rather die than let him touch me with his blood soaked hands.

[He Who Shall Not Be Named 2]

Consider this for a minute:

 

Nuclear technology, from power plants to bombs, is essentially a United States invention (with some help from Master Q's avitar). Yet there are a slew of anti-American countries that are actively pursuing that technology, and they have no ethical problem doing so.

 

We also have to remember we are talking about a holographic representation of a war criminal, not the criminal itself.

 

Information and technology isn't good or evil, and it is often the case that technology developed for evil purposes has good applications.

[MrPsychic 1]

I'm sure you're familiar with the saying "Letting the genie out of the bottle" in terms of nuclear power, Van Roy.

[He Who Shall Not Be Named 2]

I'm sure you're familiar with the saying "Letting the genie out of the bottle" in terms of nuclear power, Van Roy.

My point is that technology exists independent of the motives of the inventors. Applications of that technology must also, therefore, be independent of the inventors.

 

As it relates to the original question, the application of Cardassian medical procedures is independent of the mad scientist inventor, and it can be used ethicly without validating the mad scientist's intents or methods.

[Angela 1]

My ancestry is one of Jewish leading back to Poland, so I can see myself in this episode. I don't know what I would do, I guess I wouldn't take the medical care of a former Nazi doctor who experimented on Jews. I would rather die than let him touch me with his blood soaked hands.

 

 

Fraid to break it to you hun,but most of our medical knowledge comes from those murdering <Big ugly swear word needs insertion here>.

 

Personally my lineage on my mothers side somewhere along the line is Jewish, I would choose to honour the life of the person who died at the butchers hands, so that because of his death others did live. It is the only way I can make it ok to live in my opinion.

[Odo 0]

Most of todays medical knowlage

comes from unethical and gruesome

measures.Dating all the way back

to the Middle Ages. When the use to

Dig up fresh bodys (ie steal them)

To experament on.

 

 

Was what Mary Shelly used as a basis

for her book Frankenstien.

[ARMS 0]

Picture this for a hypothetical;

 

you're on an island, you have a fire and a pot of water to boil, the only food is eggs, you eat them without boiling you'll die, but the person who first boiled eggs was a mass murderer of your anscestors.

 

Rediculous thought, but the point is;

 

THERE'S ONLY 1 WAY TO BOIL AN EGG!

 

Who cares who came up with the idea.

[Lady Britannia 0]

One could argue that using the information gathered by unethical medical research would at least provide some good to come from the suffering of the victim. So although they died, if that information can save others, then they didn't die for nothing. On the other hand, it can be argued that using medical knowledge obtained by unethical practices tacitly approves those practices and may encourage it in the future. Overall, I would say the best approach is to use any useful medical knowledge, but punish the one who gathered it unethically. Seperate the man/woman from the knowledge since it's not the knowledge itself that is the problem.

[ARMS 0]

One could argue that using the information gathered by unethical medical research would at least provide some good to come from the suffering of the victim. So although they died, if that information can save others, then they didn't die for nothing. On the other hand, it can be argued that using medical knowledge obtained by unethical practices tacitly approves those practices and may encourage it in the future. Overall, I would say the best approach is to use any useful medical knowledge, but punish the one who gathered it unethically. Seperate the man/woman from the knowledge since it's not the knowledge itself that is the problem.

Good point, you're as bad for late nights as I