A volte la lettura di un semplice articolo di cronaca, e lo trattamento che ne da’ la stampa, riesce ad essere più chiaro di mille parole.
Mi riferisco, in particolare, ad un evento di cronaca accaduto in Germania, e che in molti abbiamo sentito solo tramite la rete internet e non certo perché i giornali nostrani si sono premurati di darcene notizia: un medico ebreo si è rifiutato di operare un paziente German who had tattooed on his shoulder, the swastika.
course, most of the comments I have read on the subject, the emphasis is on the poor jew hit in sensitivity, so high as to force him to fail ethics medical professional that requires the physician to treat any patient without any discrimination of sex, race or political faith (unless it is to be fascists, of course!). We would, every so often, that it was running so deep a feeling for a moment to look at what happens in Gaza. But that's another story.
In some articles, always on the internet, I read that the "poor" doctor would be the son of a detainee who died at Auschwitz. As a man of 46 years may be the son of a man who died twenty years ago but remains a mystery of faith. Faith in the Holocaust, of course!
But to understand the question you just always do the famous trick, the one that always works: the roles reversed. Think of a doctor who, while preparing to do an operation, he realizes that the patient has a star tattooed on the arm of David and refuse to operate. Can you imagine what a media lynching, not to mention the serious and immediate consequences on his career, would be subjected? We would say, rightly, that have tattooed a particular symbol, as this can reconnect to the ideas that many may find offensive or repugnant, does not mean in itself be a criminal or a crime (unless the symbol is in plain sight, which is not in this case), and we would say that a doctor must work all, without distinction : so much so that even criminals are entitled to primary health care.
This is another small demonstration that the rules, even medical ones, obviously for someone well-defined can be interpreted in a somewhat 'more elastic. Let me be clear: the patient, this dangerous criminal who has dared to just have a symbol tattooed on his arm contrary to the bleak political correctness (fascist) so fashionable today, was not left dying on the operating table. We found another doctor with a little professional ethics' sounder. Oh well, who are elected, but here we are in the Middle East and certain things, at least not yet, they can not afford it!
course, most of the comments I have read on the subject, the emphasis is on the poor jew hit in sensitivity, so high as to force him to fail ethics medical professional that requires the physician to treat any patient without any discrimination of sex, race or political faith (unless it is to be fascists, of course!). We would, every so often, that it was running so deep a feeling for a moment to look at what happens in Gaza. But that's another story.
In some articles, always on the internet, I read that the "poor" doctor would be the son of a detainee who died at Auschwitz. As a man of 46 years may be the son of a man who died twenty years ago but remains a mystery of faith. Faith in the Holocaust, of course!
But to understand the question you just always do the famous trick, the one that always works: the roles reversed. Think of a doctor who, while preparing to do an operation, he realizes that the patient has a star tattooed on the arm of David and refuse to operate. Can you imagine what a media lynching, not to mention the serious and immediate consequences on his career, would be subjected? We would say, rightly, that have tattooed a particular symbol, as this can reconnect to the ideas that many may find offensive or repugnant, does not mean in itself be a criminal or a crime (unless the symbol is in plain sight, which is not in this case), and we would say that a doctor must work all, without distinction : so much so that even criminals are entitled to primary health care.
This is another small demonstration that the rules, even medical ones, obviously for someone well-defined can be interpreted in a somewhat 'more elastic. Let me be clear: the patient, this dangerous criminal who has dared to just have a symbol tattooed on his arm contrary to the bleak political correctness (fascist) so fashionable today, was not left dying on the operating table. We found another doctor with a little professional ethics' sounder. Oh well, who are elected, but here we are in the Middle East and certain things, at least not yet, they can not afford it!
0 comments:
Post a Comment