Posted 3/24/2022 12:39 PM (GMT 0)
I took a course in biomedical ethics as a college student a long time ago. And, yes, we did talk about the dilemmas of the day--and some that were predictable at the time and are now present day. Such as: If we have clear genetic marker information in parents that have a high probability of a massive, incurable, deadly birth defect in their child (the example of the day was Ashke**** Jews and Tay-Sachs disease), is it appropriate to counsel them not to have children?
One thing I know is this axiom: you cannot legislate morality. And, politics should never, ever, get involved in medical ethics.
An example I remember from some years ago: Back in the 80's, Dr. C. Everett Koop was Surgeon General, and before that he was chief of the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. When he was at CHOP, his team did one of the first conjoined twin separations where the twins shared a 6 chambered heart, and the surgery required that one of the twins would not survive the surgery. It's a long story, but was handled well, and everyone grasped the ultimate dilemma: was it ethical to sacrifice one to save the other, with the alternative being both would die without the surgery?
And then, when he was Surgeon General, a similar case came along, and Congress got involved, with all kinds of political posturing and screaming. Injunctions were filed, etc etc, and I believe the twins died while it was winding through the courts. Koop kept silent during it, because he had no place in the debate. He did write, in his book later on, that he was disgusted by the political scene taking over what was (and should have stayed) a very personal tragedy involving real people.