RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

TheHeretic -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/8/2009 9:11:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Funny how neither of you stay on topic



          Fair enough, O59.

    Should the medical community sanction those who aided or attended torture?  No. 

     I think one easy solution to the ethical dilemma in these cases, and the more problematic death penalty area of practice, would be to hire physicians who have lost their license to practice medicine for some reason or another.



DavanKael -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/8/2009 9:15:07 PM)

I haven't read all of this thread and I am sure my opinion won't be the most popular but it's mine: torture happens as a matter of course in contentious matters internationally.  I don't have a problem with our military using it.  If it helps to keep me and/or mine safe in any way, groovy!  :> 
As for the Red Cross, not a big fan.  Had a friend who was a hemophiliac...learned all I needed to know when I learned that they knowingly infected thousands of people with hiv because of cost considerations. 
  Davan



slvemike4u -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/8/2009 10:01:23 PM)

Being slow to institute a screening process for tainted blood...is not knowingly infecting thousands of people with HIV not even close.
As far as your thoughts on torture...as you said it is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
They do seem to be diametrically opposed viewpoints though...on the one hand you are exhibiting a concern for others....and on the other you quite glibly announce you could give a shit...as long as you and yours are safer ....or have the illusion of.



barelynangel -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 4:25:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
The government may let them off the hook but their colleagues don`t have to.


This is not directed at the quoter above but instead the concept he has initiated.

I do defense in medical malpractice and i can guarantee you that it would be VERY difficult to find experts etc that would be WILLING to castrate these doctors and for everyone you find you would find experts to contradict same. So don't be to sure their colleages would rally around to castrate these medical professionals. This is partly what i was speaking about earlier when people decided they sounded better trying to attack me and what i enjoy posting on in other areas instead of the discussing the topic. In my experience of med mal cases, and yes defense of physicians who have to go before the Board for a license review or possible sanctions, its not easy finding experts willing to testify against their colleagues. Its why a good 80% of our cases in general get voluntarily non-suited or settled for a lot less than they really wanted. Because they can't find experts all that easy to prove they were unethical or wrong in their decisions hell even in outright negligence, many medical professionals do not like to testifiy against their colleagues. Its also why med mal cases have taken a dive when the law changed that required a Plaintiff to disclose their experts BEFORE or WHEN they file their Complaint. People may say well why is that significant in the fall of med mal cases, well its because for most things, its not easy for Plaintiff's to find experts. What people don't get is ethics is a very vague concept. And many times people attempt to place their own understanding of what they THINK is ethical on people who they have no clue as to what transpired or have very LITTLE information -- which is the case here. We are not given enough information to draw a definite conclusion. People are speaking highly based on their emotional reaction to the word TORTURE.

The concept of ethics is very hard to prove. The concept of willful negligence is hard to prove. Medical professionals will be just as the general public on the message board -- off the record they will have their opinions. This isn't about torture, this is about the actions of the medical professionals involved and whether they violated their ethical responsibility, and i think that is where people are becoming tunnel visioned. They are looking at torture and is that correct or incorrect. That's NOT how the Board would evaluate these professionals. Also, if what was occuring WAS LEGAL at the time of occurance, and the professional did his job based on the parameters of what he was ALLOWED, it would be very hard to prove what he was doing was unethical legally (i.e., before the Board). Take out the word torture, because it seems people are looking at this as a omg they sanctioned torture, instead of they made decisions with the parameters they were allowed. That is the emotional trigger of this whole discussion TORTURE OMG. People aren't capable of disconnecting the name of the actions occuring and seeing the situation as a whole within parameters set for the professionals.

You also have to be aware that professionals in any manner tend to realize that if their monitoring agency starts to police them on terms of the publics outrage they are ALL screwed, because each situation is unique and many times what may seem unethical to some is simply because those observing don't see the same perception as the participants. BUt yeah, its easy for an observer to say castrate the bastard.

Yeah but really i don't know what i am speaking of because all i know is slavery and Gor. Geesh, it amazes me how many people see this message forum on CM as the WHOLE world of what someone may or may not know based on topics. But it makes them feel more superior lol in their little corner of CM, who am i to defuse them of their delusion.

I challenge people to discuss this whole issue in detail without ever bringing in the word torture or prisoners or anything relating to this emtional trigger. I don't think people can because its not the actions people are discussing its the word TORTURE they are discussing.


angel






TreasureKY -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 5:16:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

Actually, no: your stance is proof to me that I am correct, and that you just picked an argument for the sake of it.


lol... This amuses me. 

Does this mean that, since you refuse to specifically identify the individuals who participated, what their medical credentials are, and what particular code of ethics that they adhere to... that I should assume you cannot, therefore I must be correct?  [;)]



kittinSol -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 5:18:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

  Should the medical community sanction those who aided or attended torture?  No.  



I think you will find that it is up to the medical community to decide. As for this:

quote:



I think one easy solution to the ethical dilemma in these cases, and the more problematic death penalty area of practice, would be to hire physicians who have lost their license to practice medicine for some reason or another.



A doctor without a license is just a quack. It's surrealistic of you to advocate the use of non-doctors to perform the work of doctors. I have a better solution: outlaw the death penalty and make sure torture is never committed again in the name of 'freedom'.

PS: KY, I just saw your post above... you really ought to see a quack for that thing [;)] your eye.



StrangerThan -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 5:33:34 AM)

I didn't read the entire article. I did read enough to see that the report didn't go into exactly who the medical people were. Your subject line says medics, which makes me think of corpsmen. If they were military personnel, my answer is no. If they were for-hire people, my answer is yes.



TheHeretic -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 6:32:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

I think you will find that it is up to the medical community to decide. 




      I've seen this line of reasoning from you before, Kitten.  Funny how it completely vanishes when you wish to criticize a group you have no understanding of, or connection with...



kittinSol -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 6:48:45 AM)

You and a couple of others need to grow up and to stop trying to drag the debate down to playground spats and character assassination. Think you can manage that? Is all you can contribute to this discussion really just this: "hire crooked quacks who've lost their licenses so that we can continue to torture people and put them to death"? Anyway... *sigh*.  

"There are accepted roles for health professionals working in recognized, official, places of detention such as police stations and prisons wherein the health professionals have the health care and best interests of the detainee as their primary consideration. To this end, when a person enters an official detention facility or system, a medical assessment of their medical status is required in order to meet their current and ongoing health needs. In the case of a normal, lawful interrogation, a physician may be asked to provide a medical opinion, within the usual bounds of medical confidentiality, as to whether existing mental or physical health problems would preclude the individual from being questioned. Secondly, a physician may rightly be requested to provide medical treatment to a person suffering a medical emergency during questioning. This accepted role of the physician, or any other health professional, clearly does not extend to ruling on the permissibility, or not, of any form of physical or psychological ill-treatment. The physician, and any other health professionals, are expressly prohibited from using their scientific knowledge and skills to facilitate such practices in any way. On the contrary, the role of the physician and any other health professional involved in the care of detainees is explicitly to protect them from such ill-treatment and there can be no exceptional circumstances invoked to excuse this obligation.

With the exceptions detailed in the above paragraph, any interrogation process that requires a health profession to either pronounce on the subject’s fitness to withstand such a procedure, or which requires a health professional to monitor the actual procedure, must have inherent health risks. As such, the interrogation process is contrary to international law and the participation of health personnel in such a process is contrary to international standards of medical ethics. In the case of the alleged participation of health personnel in the detention and interrogation of the fourteen detainees, their primary purpose appears to have been to serve the interrogation process, and not the patient. In so doing the health personnel have condoned, and participated, in ill-treatment."

From the ICRC report. http://www.nybooks.com/icrc-report.pdf



FirmhandKY -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:00:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

PS: KY, I just saw your post above... you really ought to see a quack for that thing [;)] your eye.


Gratuitous personal attack.

Firm

PS. Jesus ... I just saw your last post .... "stop trying to drag the debate down to playground spats and character assassination"?!!!

You really should stop and look at how you talk and post, because that's about the only thing you do post, kittin.



slvemike4u -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:05:43 AM)

That just about covers it.....and with that in mind I reiterate what I said earlier...this thread will break down along two basic lines .Those who believe they should be sanctioned are aghast at what went on in Gitmo.
Those that do not believe any sanctions should be forthcoming don't give a shit what went on in Gitmo and wouldn't give a shit if it continues....so long as they have the illusion of increased safety.



kittinSol -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:14:06 AM)

Your girlfriend uses the [;)] so often, there's definitely cause for concern. Perhaps it's allergy season? I don't know. If you think it's a personal insult, so be it. On that note, do you have anything to add to the discussion?

1. Medical personnel violated their code of ethic - arguing otherwise is a disingenuous exercise in trying to redefine 'medical ethics' in order to diminish the gravity of the facts in question - something the right excels at (thanks, Lee Atwater).
2. There is no talk of penalising the doctors and nurses involved with the full force of the law (contrary to what certain individuals are trying to imply on this thread).
3. Their professional associations are responsible for any professional sanctions that will come their way as a result of their actions pertaining to the torture of prisonners.
4. It's only a problem for the supporters of the ex administration because it emphasises that what went on was illegal, and they would rather the world forgot about it.
5. This isn't a political argument: it's a moral one.





ShaharThorne -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:20:29 AM)

I agree with Panda as in them work as aides in the prison system. This way, the prison system will not have to pay so much for outside aides and it can be a condition of their sentencing.

As for the aide being the only one on hand to help me in case of emergency until the EMTs get there, let them. I come from a nursing family and even I had training in 2-man CPR in case of emergency that including infants and small children. I no longer practice but I keep my certs up. Any help that can be rendered is necessary in order to get vital aid to the accident victim. I have seen too many times where people bypass the accident and refused to render aid and they get ticketed for their lack of actions.



FirmhandKY -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:33:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

Your girlfriend uses the [;)] so often, there's definitely cause for concern. Perhaps it's allergy season? I don't know. If you think it's a personal insult, so be it.

*shrug* typical.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

On that note, do you have anything to add to the discussion?

Sure. You just haven't been "listening". See barelynangel's comments.

My point is that you (and others) are making several assumptions based on your own biases which many may not accept. Again, see barelynangels last post.

Ya know ... like actually read what she is saying, consider it, and respond to her with something other than than snide remarks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

1. Medical personnel violated their code of ethic - arguing otherwise is a disingenuous exercise in trying to redefine 'medical ethics' in order to diminish the gravity of the facts in question - something the right excels at (thanks, Lee Atwater).

You must love Lee Atwater. What did he ever do to you? [:D]

You are assuming:

1. That torture occurred.
2. That whatever did occur was illegal.
3. That for some nefarious reason no legal action will occur,
3. That you know all about what happened including that
a. Doctors were directly involved,
b. that they agreed with your definition of "torture",
c. but participated anyway,
d. that any "medical ethics" organization to which they belong also agree with your definitions and understanding of what occurred,
4. That everything said by the AQ murderers is accurate,
5. That ... well ... hell ... you get the drift.

Like I said ... a lot of "assuming" going on here.


quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

2. There is no talk of penalising the doctors and nurses involved with the full force of the law (contrary to what certain individuals are trying to imply on this thread).

You mean like your sidekick, Owner59?

See my short list of your assumptions in the previous question.


quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

3. Their professional associations are responsible for any professional sanctions that will come their way as a result of their actions pertaining to the torture of prisonners.

Assumptions, again.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

4. It's only a problem for the supporters of the ex administration because it emphasises that what went on was illegal, and they would rather the world forgot about it.

It's a problem to you because the world doesn't seem to always bow down to your wishes and operate according to your desires.

Sorry about that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

5. This isn't a political argument: it's a moral one.

It's not a political argument?

uh huh.

Firm



StrangerThan -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:40:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

That just about covers it.....and with that in mind I reiterate what I said earlier...this thread will break down along two basic lines .Those who believe they should be sanctioned are aghast at what went on in Gitmo.
Those that do not believe any sanctions should be forthcoming don't give a shit what went on in Gitmo and wouldn't give a shit if it continues....so long as they have the illusion of increased safety.


Giving a shit and seizing every opportunity to condemn are different things. And when it comes to giving a shit, I don't give one shit where anyone else lives in regards to this question. If you are an American, that means, US citizen, torture is something you should despise, and rights something you should fight for. It is incredibly un-American to detain without counsel, without charges, without any form of due process, and vastly un-American to torture your enemies. If you have to sit down and play with legal definitions to decide who should be treated humanely and who should not, you've lost a good deal of what it means to be American.

On the flip side, from the article:

"The report does not indicate whether the medical workers at the C.I.A. sites were physicians, other professionals or both."

Add to that the declaration that these practices were legal by the Justice Department - political whores that they are - as a military person serving a country at war, your options are to perform the duty assigned to you or risk imprisonment yourself. Given the paranoid behavior of the last administration, I wouldn't put it past them to consider refusal of such duty to be aiding and abetting the enemy. Sanctioning medics and military medical personnel if done, should be done on a case by case basis, not as a general rule fostered by those who "give a shit" and absolutely should not be done on recommendation of an entity like the Red Cross, nor by the outraged hang-wringers who think of war in clean, sanitary terms defined by the rules of chilvary.

Sanctioning medical personnel who hired on for the pay, yes. But then again, they were simply following legal, if unethical guidelines. In doing so it becomes an exercise in punishing those you can because you can't punish the ones who were really responsible. The entire Bush administration should be sanctioned and every blasted one of the policy makers should be put on trial for actions that were clearly and undeniably un-Constitutional.

Yes, I give a shit but having been on the ground in places like the Middle East, I can honestly say I did things that I didn't like, things that were probably unethical, things that harmed. I can also say I did those things because those were my orders and because I didn't have the information to know whether or not refusing to do them endangered the lives of people back home, people in the next bunk over, people in the next detachment sent to the area.

You don't have to hunt people to vent your outrage and indignation upon. Most of them are walking free and in retirement right now enjoying millions they made off you.



RacerJim -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:50:13 AM)

Hey kittinSol,

If politics isn't part-n-parcel of this argument then why #4?

The plain, simple and irrefutable fact is that it's only a problem for Clintonites/Obamabots because it underscores that the Bush administration was in fact serious about obtaining actionable intelligence with which to prevent more acts of terrorism.

The proof is in the pudding.  On Clinton's "legal" watch the 1st WTC terrorist attack plus 6 subsequent terrorist attacks against non-domestic U.S. assets.  On Bush's "torture" watch the 2nd WTC terrorist attack plus 0 subsequent terrorist attacks against any U.S. assets.   




barelynangel -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:51:37 AM)

quote:

US citizen, torture is something you should despise


What constitutes torture?  Many times what many civilians would call torture is simply aggressive interrogation.  

angel



samboct -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 7:52:37 AM)

"I challenge people to discuss this whole issue in detail without ever bringing in the word torture or prisoners or anything relating to this emtional trigger. I don't think people can because its not the actions people are discussing its the word TORTURE they are discussing."

Good Grief!  That's like saying discuss the actions of a camp guard at Auschwitz without using the word "murder".

Here's a simple litmus test for you- and the board. 

1)  If you're a physician, you're there to practice medicine.  Who's your patient- the sadist doing the torture or the person being tortured?
2)  The role of physician is of a healer.  If the physician cannot help the healing process (or at least make a decent stab at it based on available knowledge) then they are supposed to stand aside.
3)  How can you possibly call a physicians actions which result in pain, fear, and physical and psychological damage to his/her patient with no possible health benefits anything other than aiding and abetting torture?  Is this good medicine?  Would it be good medicine in a normal doctor patient relationship?

Consider the greater ramifications of your claim.  If these medical personnel aren't condemned, then how do physicians build the necessary trust for caring for their patients?  Would you go to a physician which thought that it was acceptable to allow the torture of a patient in his/her care?  I'd punch him out!  (and they can put me in jail for doing so.)  If that's your defense of these physicians, then like many lawyers, you fail to examine the consequences of your actions.  Your claim that ethics are not well understood is neither accurate nor relevant.

From my perspective, the only possible defense of these physicians/medical personnel is claiming that the orders of the state trump personal ethics.  This argument is the justification for physicians to be present at executions and the actions of the physicians at Gitmo are clearly similar and under similar circumstances.  I agree with Kittin- this is one more reason to get rid of executions- because it allows a legal loophole for torture.


Sam



kittinSol -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 8:04:55 AM)

The ICRC's report details what went on at length: some people just pretend they can't see the evidence.



slvemike4u -> RE: Should medics who helped torture be sanctioned by med.community? (4/9/2009 8:07:27 AM)

Stranger Than...is my position in this discussion somehow eluding you....or did I just completely misunderstand your last post?



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125