Monster Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I just don't see how this is really an ethical question. The only possible option to keep ANY of them alive would be to give the water to the mechanic and the pilot. If one of them dies, the plane either wouldn't get fixed or wouldn't be flown out of there and all 3 would be dead. I don't understand how there are multiple scenarios here. What else could you say? "well, to make sure everyone gets an equal opportunity, they should draw straws and whoever gets the shortest gets to die" OR, the woman and pilot could get the water and the mechanic could drink the urine of the other two..thereby keeping everyone alive until they get the plane fixed. Seriously though...I'd like to hear another possible answer to this question other than mine where all 3 won't end up dying...?? Aye, therein lies the rub for the basis of an ethical question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 That seems like a trick question... Does the pregnant woman have any uses other than being pregnant?? (since I notice they mention the professions of the other two but not of the pregnant woman) And also, they're not counting the fetus as a survivor are they? In which case, the woman could be the pilot AND the pregnant woman...so then really there are just the two survivors and the fetus. I would say the mechanic and the pilot so they can fix the plan and get the heck out of there...if they keep the pregnant woman alive they will all be stuck there and die. Is there another answer to this??? Yeah, I dunno, it doesn't seem like a very good question to me at ALL. The whole idea is that there should be at least 2 viable alternatives to dealing with whatever situation is thrown your way. Here, the only way this situation won't end up with everybody dying is if the water is given to the mechanic and the pilot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Ooo thats a rough one.... Here's another one I've heard: You're a rural GP and also on the board of directors for a new Emergency Ward wing in a local hospital. You and the board have just set new rules for the ER saying that patients will be treated according to priority cases, not on a first-come-first-serve basis. One of your patients as a GP is an elderly man with a history of heart/cardio problems. He has a heart attack and is rushed to the hospital, and you happen to be working at the ER that night when he arrives. You realize he will not be a "high priority" case compared to others (i.e., car accident victims, etc.), so he will not be treated quickly and most likely could die. What do you do - follow the rules you helped make for the ER or break them and treat him anyways? (p.s: this wasn't actually used in an MMI, it was brought up by an ethics professor who teachs ethics in medicine at UWO). I don't think this is an unusual situation at all. That's why we have triage. There is a reason why patients are prioritized. Sure, you can go and break the triage rules, but then what's the point of having them. If you are going to go and treat this man, you are going to forego giving care to a higher-priority patient. Now, triage varies, but generally, patients are triaged not only according to severity of injuries, but also the likelihood of them improving. We have triage in EMS, of course, it's quite different because our resources cannot be compared to that of a large hospital, but it's written pretty clear in our triage rules that if a person is critical and cannot be quickly managed on scene, they are considered dead and should be abandoned in favor of patients whose condition can actually be easily improved. I.e. we are not going to be doing CPR and defibrillating anyone in a triage situation. Triage is not about saving one person over the other, but about distributing scarce resources to those who are most likely to benefit from them. Since in this situation, you are taking your life-saving resources from a high-priority patient to a low-priority one, it'd be damn hard to justify your actions. Honestly, if I did that on a multiple casualty scene, I would expect to be sued by the family of the higher-priority patient later on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kandy4 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 That seems like a trick question... Does the pregnant woman have any uses other than being pregnant?? (since I notice they mention the professions of the other two but not of the pregnant woman) And also, they're not counting the fetus as a survivor are they? In which case, the woman could be the pilot AND the pregnant woman...so then really there are just the two survivors and the fetus. I would say the mechanic and the pilot so they can fix the plan and get the heck out of there...if they keep the pregnant woman alive they will all be stuck there and die. Is there another answer to this??? I would have said the same as you... if they only give it to her, the baby and her might die without medical attention anyways at birth. And they will certainly die afterwards without water. Better to try to get everyone out with the mechanic and pilot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medhopeful123456 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Yeah, I dunno, it doesn't seem like a very good question to me at ALL. The whole idea is that there should be at least 2 viable alternatives to dealing with whatever situation is thrown your way. Here, the only way this situation won't end up with everybody dying is if the water is given to the mechanic and the pilot. What about giving it to the person in the most need of the water? Instead of making decisions about who "deserves" the water the most or who might benefit the most, how about allocating it based on giving it to the person in the most need so as to lengthen their time so that they might all get saved. If we are to relate this back to healthcare and the water be medicine in short supply, can we really "choose" who to give it to? Is it ethical to choose who is the most deserving of medical care. Isn't it our duty to treat those who need it the most? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamer Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Yeah, try quantifying "need," especially in a life or death situation. Not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 What about giving it to the person in the most need of the water? Instead of making decisions about who "deserves" the water the most or who might benefit the most, how about allocating it based on giving it to the person in the most need so as to lengthen their time so that they might all get saved. If we are to relate this back to healthcare and the water be medicine in short supply, can we really "choose" who to give it to? Is it ethical to choose who is the most deserving of medical care. Isn't it our duty to treat those who need it the most? Everybody NEEDS food and water. You're gonna die in like 3 days without water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Why don't you build a fire and get more water that way, from melting the snow? LOL, I don't think there was necessarily any snow...and there's no need to melt snow to get water, you could just eat snow....lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remington Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 You shouldnt eat snow if your becoming dehydrated. YOur body would use more resources putting energy into melting the snow then you would benefit from the adding water (good old swimming lessons back in the day taught me that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medaholic Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Some Sample Questions ... off the top of my head 1. You catch a friend cheating on a test, What would you do? 2. Your friend is pregnant and she wants to get an abortion. Her parents oppose it. What would you say to them? 3. You are an emergency doc on call. A patient comes in with severe problems, but refuses to be seen by you because of your race. What do you do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.