A patient is a patient is a patient. That is one of the basic principles of medical ethics. In accordance with this principle, we do not expect a doctor to turn into a judge or a financial expert, but to attend to any and all patients, no matter their crimes or their financial status. The principle holds even if a patient has brought his illness on himself. Doctors swear to uphold it, and everyone in the medical establishment is expected to follow it. However, like any other ethical principle or value, this principle too can turn into a serious mistake. No principle ever stands alone, and no value can render all other values invalid. The question of medical priorities is usually raised when resources are limited, when the medical staff must decide whether to treat a terrorist first or a victim. In this case, other factors join the ethical debate, and the most important one is the principle of justice: "Justice, justice you shall pursue" (Deuteronomy 16:20). Since it is the terrorist who has brought this disaster upon himself, as well as others, the principle of justice and fairness determines that it does not matter how serious his condition is -- the victims should be helped first. The ethical decision in such cases must lean toward treating the victim over the offender. The argument that physicians must blindly follow their professional obligations regardless of other ethical aspects is wrong, just as it is wrong for journalists, rabbis, judges and drivers. Obviously, ethics is not just a theoretical debate, but also a practical matter. In the fog of battle, the issue is much more complicated and medical personnel must be allowed to perform their duties and treat the wounded without having to engage in complicated dilemmas. If a doctor cannot tell who is the perpetrator and who is the victim, the right thing to do is to treat the most severely wounded person first. However, in most terrorist attacks, it is completely clear who drove the car or wielded the ax, and who was an innocent victim who lost a leg -- and doctors should treat the victims before the terrorist. An additional reservation is between a terrorist in critical condition and a lightly injured civilian. In this case, which is the exception and not the norm, the terrorist should be treated first, and his punishment must be left to the judicial system. Constantly citing the unfortunate lynch of an Eritrean national, who was brutally beaten to death in the Beersheba bus station after he was misidentified as a terrorist, is wrong. Bad cases make bad laws, meaning that an extreme case like this is a poor basis for a general law and would lead to even worse mistakes. Therefore, these are therefore the ethical principles governing victim-offender relations: When the picture is clear, a doctor must treat the victim first, even if his condition is less serious, unless there is a large gap between the severity of both individuals' injuries. When the situation is unclear, the physician must first treat the person in the most serious condition, without having to undergo questioning or investigation.
'Justice, justice you shall pursue'
הרב יובל שרלו
הכותב הוא ראש המרכז לאתיקה בארגון רבני צהר