專欄新型冠狀病毒

Doctors are being asked to play God

So who decides between life and death? As the Covid-19 outbreak threatens to overwhelm healthcare systems, it also presents a harrowing human dilemma. We have caught a glimpse of this in Italy. Distilled to its essentials, it can be expressed more or less as follows.

Doctor A has one ventilator and two patients in the grip of the coronavirus. Arriving first at the hospital, patient B, a 65-year-old retiree thought to have only a slim, albeit still measurable, chance of survival, is being kept alive on the ventilator. Patient C, a 35-year old teacher who arrived later, is deteriorating fast, but is judged to have a high chance of recovery if transferred to the ventilator.

Considering this quandary in the abstract, my sense is that most people take a broadly utilitarian view: the doctor would be right, perhaps should even be compelled, to switch around the two patients. Physicians swear a sacred oath to uphold life. Transferring patient C to the ventilator would be the route most likely to do so.

您已閱讀19%(1007字),剩餘81%(4316字)包含更多重要資訊,訂閱以繼續探索完整內容,並享受更多專屬服務。
版權聲明:本文版權歸FT中文網所有,未經允許任何單位或個人不得轉載,複製或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵權必究。

菲力普•斯蒂芬斯

菲力普•斯蒂芬斯(Philip Stephens)目前擔任英國《金融時報》的副主編。作爲FT的首席政治評論員,他的專欄每兩週更新一次,評論全球和英國的事務。他著述甚豐,曾經爲英國前首相托尼-布萊爾寫傳記。斯蒂芬斯畢業於牛津大學,目前和家人住在倫敦。

相關文章

相關話題

設置字型大小×
最小
較小
默認
較大
最大
分享×