Why Would Anyone Have A Leasehold?
Society & Culture2 mins ago
Have Your Say ..... vote
3 Answers
Are the questions being 'carefully worded' to get the desired answers? The current options ....
1. Faith is very important in some people's lives; a person's beliefs should always be respected and never over-ruled despite medical fact
so, extending this logic of 'never over-ruled ...... if your faith preaches 'violence' towards other faiths, then it is okay to act accordingly?
2. A person's faith should be taken into consideration; however, doctors should be allowed to over-rule a person's faith if it is a case of life and death
surley it is a case of life OR death .... don't think you can have both? should doctor's be God?
3. Doctors are meant to treat people and make them well, religion should never interfere with this no matter what the circumstances � serious or not
extending this logic ..... a doctor dictatorship?
1. Faith is very important in some people's lives; a person's beliefs should always be respected and never over-ruled despite medical fact
so, extending this logic of 'never over-ruled ...... if your faith preaches 'violence' towards other faiths, then it is okay to act accordingly?
2. A person's faith should be taken into consideration; however, doctors should be allowed to over-rule a person's faith if it is a case of life and death
surley it is a case of life OR death .... don't think you can have both? should doctor's be God?
3. Doctors are meant to treat people and make them well, religion should never interfere with this no matter what the circumstances � serious or not
extending this logic ..... a doctor dictatorship?
Answers
1 to 3 of 3
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by athenae. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I believe every 'adult' of sound mind should have the right to choose whether they want to refuse treatment for themselves, and that doctors should not be able to over-rule this choice under any circumstances
I think doctors should (and in fact they do by Court Order) overall this choice if it involves another person (eg. the child of a JW)
There is nowhere to express this on the survey, so I have chosen for the first option (which at present has the least votes)..
I think doctors should (and in fact they do by Court Order) overall this choice if it involves another person (eg. the child of a JW)
There is nowhere to express this on the survey, so I have chosen for the first option (which at present has the least votes)..
Well insofar as I recall the woman had pre-empted any medical interference by flagrantly signing a form which stated she did not want to receive blood in the event that �despite medical fact� it would be required. As far as we know, for all intents and purposes, she did this in bona mens.
Had she done this under forceful circumstances then this may be a different matter � although some may say in doing so she was clearly not of sound mind. However, in general purposes, for a doctor to ignore the written statement/authority/request of an individual would be a disregard for patient rights and mean they would be acting � albeit for the greater good - ultra vires.
None of the options covers that really. I abstain.
Had she done this under forceful circumstances then this may be a different matter � although some may say in doing so she was clearly not of sound mind. However, in general purposes, for a doctor to ignore the written statement/authority/request of an individual would be a disregard for patient rights and mean they would be acting � albeit for the greater good - ultra vires.
None of the options covers that really. I abstain.
1 to 3 of 3
