Doctors with Borders

Front cover of Conatus 8, no. 2
PDF
Published: Dec 31, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.35197
Keywords:
dual-loyalty dilemma medical ethics military ethics non-lethal weapons development neutrality impartiality physician-as-fighter mass casualty triage
Lu-Vada Dunford
University of Toronto, Canada
https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5719-8025
Abstract

This paper presents the real case of a military surgeon who is the only one working at a small hospital in Iraq. The military surgeon can only operate on one wounded soldier due to limited medical resources. The first wounded soldier to arrive is the enemy. The second wounded soldier to arrive shortly after the enemy is a compatriot. Both soldiers will die without lifesaving surgery. The military surgeon is ordered by his superior not to operate on the enemy. Under the Geneva Conventions, physician-soldiers are legally required to give medical attention impartially. The only exception is urgent medical need. Both soldiers, friend and foe, have an urgent medical need. Dual-loyalty dilemmas such as this one can arise for military medical practitioners when loyalty to patients comes into conflict with loyalty to third parties such as the state. In this paper, several solutions to the dual-loyalty dilemma are considered and rejected. Solutions to the dual-loyalty dilemma ultimate fail because they rest on the physician-as-healer model which grounds contemporary medical ethics. The view that the ultimate objective of physicians and medicine is winning battles is defended. Physicians are non-neutral and partial fighters who sometimes must do harm. Medicine is a weapon that physicians use to fight an enemy. The only relevant differences between a soldier and physician are the kind of enemy, location of the enemy, and the type of weapons used against the enemy. The paper concludes that physician-soldiers are doctors with borders. There is no dual-loyalty dilemma on the physician-as-fighter model. The military surgeon should obey his orders and not operate on the enemy. Implications of the physician-as-fighter model for mass casualty triage and physician-soldier participation in non-lethal weapons development are considered.

Article Details
  • Section
  • Articles
  • Categories
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g. post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (preferably in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Allhoff, Fritz, ed. Physicians at War: The Dual-Loyalties Challenge. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2008. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6912-3.
Allhoff, Fritz. “Physician Involvement in Hostile Interrogations.” In Physicians at War: The Dual-Loyalties Challenge, edited by Fritz Allhoff, 91-104. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6912-3_6.
American Medical Association. AMA Code of Medical Ethics. 2015-2016. www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/code-medical-ethics-overview.
American Medical Association. Principles of Medical Ethics. Adopted June 1957; revised June 1980; revised June 2001. https://www.ama-assn.org/sites/ama-assn.org/files/corp/media-browser/principles-of-medical-ethics.pdf.
American Medical Association. Proceedings of the National Medical Conventions. Philadelphia, PA: AMA, 1847. http://ama.nmtvault.com/jsp/PsImageViewer.jsp?doc_id=6863b9b4-a8b5-4ea0-9e63-ca2ed554e876%2Fama_arch%2FAD000001%2F0039PROC&pg_seq=85.
API. Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977. Geneva: ICRC.
Bloche, M. Gregg, and Jonathan H. Marks. “When Doctors Go to War.” The New England Journal of Medicine 352, no. 1 (2005): 3-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp048346.
Coleman, Nikki. “When to Suspend Bioethical Principles in Military Medicine.” In Health Care in Contexts of Risk, Uncertainty, and Hybridity, edited by Daniel Messelken and David T. Winkler, 221-234. Cham: Springer, 2022.
Daniels, Marc, dir. Star Trek: The Original Series. Season 2, Episode 4, “Mirror, Mirror.” Aired October 6, 1967, on NBC. https://www.primevideo.com/detail/0I3S517SCXAFEUZ0M8P0NY3PFA/ref=atv_dp_season_select_s2.
Dual Loyalty Working Group. Dual Loyalty and Human Rights in Health Professional Practice. Proposed Guidelines and Institutional Mechanisms. Washington, D.C.: Physicians for Human Rights, 2002. https://phr.org/wp-content/uploads/2003/03/dualloyalties-2002-report.pdf.
Frisina, Michael E. “Guidelines to Prevent the Malevolent Use of Physicians in War.” In Physicians at War: The Dual-Loyalties Challenge, edited by Fritz Allhoff, 39-52. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6912-3_3.
Gross, Michael L. “Is Medicine a Pacifist Vocation or Should Doctors Help Build Bombs?” In Physicians at War: The Dual-Loyalties Challenge, edited by Fritz Allhoff, 151-166. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6912-3_9.
Gross, Michael L. “Medicalized Weapons Modern War.” The Hastings Center Report 40, no. 1 (2010): 34-43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1353/hcr.0.0229.
Gross, Michael L. “Military Medical Ethics in War and Peace.” In Routledge Handbook of Military Ethics, edited by George R. Lucas, 248-264. Abingdon: Routledge, 2015. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315813516-46.
Gross, Michael L. “The Limits of Impartial Medical Treatment During Armed Conflict.” In Military Medical Ethics for the 21st Century, edited by Michael L. Gross and Don Carrick, 71-84. Abingdon: Routledge, 2016.
Howe, Edmund G. “Mixed Agency in Military Medicine: Ethical Roles in Conflict.” In Military Medical Ethics, Volume 1, edited by Thomas E. Beam and Linette R. Spracino, 269-291. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, and Borden Institute, 2003.
Howe, Edmund G. “Point/Counterpoint – A Response to Drs Sidel and Levy.” In Military Medical Ethics, Volume 1, edited by Thomas E. Beam and Linette R. Spracino, 312-320. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, and Borden Institute, 2003.
Howe, Edmund G. “When, if ever, Should Military Physicians Violate a Military Order to Give Medical Obligations Higher Priority?” Military Medicine 180, no. 11 (2015): 1118-1119. doi: https://doi.org/10.7205/MILMED-D-15-00131.
International Committee of the Red Cross. The Fundamental Principles of The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Switzerland: ICRC, 2015. https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/topic/file_plus_list/4046-the_fundamental_principles_of_the_international_red_cross_and_red_crescent_movement.pdf.
Johnson, Rebecca J. “Serving Two Masters: When Professional Ethics Collide with Personal Morality.” In Routledge Handbook of Military Ethics, edited by George R. Lucas, 266-277. Abingdon: Routledge, 2015. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315813516.
Kaurin, Pauline Shanks. “Non-Lethal Weapons and Rules of Engagement.” In Routledge Handbook of Military Ethics, edited by George R. Lucas, 395-405. Abingdon: Routledge, 2015. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315813516.
Koch, Tom. “Editorial: Weaponising Medicine: ‘Tutti Fratelli,’ No More.” Journal of Medical Ethics 32, no. 5 (2006): 249-252. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.016485.
List, Justin M. “Medical Neutrality and Political Activism: Physicians’ Roles in Conflict Situations.” In Physicians at War: The Dual-Loyalties Challenge, edited by Fritz Allhoff, 237-253. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6912-3_14.
Madden, William, and Brian Carter. “Physician Soldier: A Moral Profession.” In Military Medical Ethics, Volume 1, edited by Thomas E. Beam and Linette R. Spracino, 269-291. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, and Borden Institute, 2003.
Nathanson, Vivienne. “The Case Against Doctor Involvement in Weapons Design and Development.” In Physicians at War: The Dual-Loyalties Challenge, edited by Fritz Allhoff, 167-177. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6912-3_10.
Orend, Brian. “Jus post bellum: The Perspective of a Just-War Theorist.” Leiden Journal of International Law 20, no. 3 (2007): 571-591. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156507004268.
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction. OPCW, 2020. https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/articles/article-ii-definitions-and-criteria.
Pellegrino, Edmund D. “The Moral Foundations of the Patient-Physician Relationship: The Essence of Medical Ethics.” In Military Medical Ethics, Volume 1, edited by Thomas E. Beam and Linette R. Spracino, 3-21. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, and Borden Institute, 2003.
Pevney, Joseph, dir. Star Trek: The Original Series. Season 1, Episode 26, “The Devil in the Dark.” March 9, 1967, on NBC. https://www.primevideo.com/detail/0RLGFOASUIWE2L5OM3DG8CJO83/ref=atv_dp_season_select_s1.
Pevney, Joseph, dir. Star Trek: The Original Series. Season 2, Episode 11, “Friday’s Child.” December 1, 1967, on NBC. https://www.primevideo.com/detail/0I3S517SCXAFEUZ0M8P0NY3PFA/ref=atv_dp_season_select_s2.
Pevney, Joseph, dir. Star Trek: The Original Series. Season 2, Episode 12, “The Deadly Years.” December 8, 1967, on NBC. https://www.primevideo.com/detail/0I3S517SCXAFEUZ0M8P0NY3PFA/ref=atv_dp_season_select_s2.
Rochon, Christiane, and Bryn Williams-Jones. “Are Military and Medical Ethics Necessarily Incompatible? A Canadian Case Study.” The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 44, no. 4 (2016): 639-651. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110516684809.
Sidel, Victor W., and Barry S. Levy. “Physician-Soldier: a Moral Dilemma.” In Military Medical Ethics, Volume 1, edited by Thomas E. Beam and Linette R. Spracino, 293-312. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, and Borden Institute, 2003.
Terry, Fiona. “The Principle of Neutrality: Is It Relevant to MSF?” Les Cahiers de Messages 113 (2000): 1-6. https://www.msf.fr/sites/default/files/2000-12-01-Terry.pdf.
United States Department of Defense. Non-Lethal Weapons (NLW) Reference Book. Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, 2012. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/URLs_Cited/OT2015/14-10078/14-10078-3.pdf.
van Bergen, Leo. “For Soldier and State: Dual Loyalty and World War One.” Medicine, Conflict, and Survival 28, no. 4 (2012): 317-334. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13623699.2012.743303.
World Medical Association. WMA Declaration of Tokyo – Guidelines for Physicians concerning Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Relation to Detention and Imprisonment. WMA, 2022. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-tokyo-guidelines-for-physicians-concerning-torture-and-other-cruel-inhuman-or-degrading-treatment-or-punishment-in-relation-to-detention-and-imprisonment/.
Zupan, Daniel, Gary Solis, Richard Schoonhoven, and George Annas. “Case Study: Dialysis for a Prisoner of War.” The Hastings Center Report 34, no. 6 (2004): 11-12. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/3528170.