Is Intolerance Intolerable? (Based on news reports from Nashville, Tennessee) A

Question

Is Intolerance Intolerable?

(Based on news reports from Nashville, Tennessee)

            A couple requests that no black males be present in the operating room (OR) during a procedure that the wife needs. When pressed, they confide their main reason: the husband is very uncomfortable about having his wife’s undressed body seen by males of other races. Just before the operation begins, the surgeon notices a black perfusionist

(a person who is responsible for oxygenation of the blood during open heart surgery) and asks him to step out of the room. He then locates another perfusionist. Afterwards, the hospital expresses its regret to the perfusionist and condemns the surgeon’s actions.

Please answer the following questions:

a)   Did the surgeon do the right thing? Whether or not it was optimal (the best choice), did the surgeon take morally permissible action?

b) Did the hospital do the right thing?

c)   The hospital has position and mission statements that affirm the dignity of everyone.       Was the surgeon’s behavior consistent with these statements? If not, does it follow     that:

i.     The position and mission statements are questionable?

ii. The surgeon’s behavior was unacceptable, or at least dubious?

iii.                The statements were mostly valid generalizations but allowed for exceptions                such as the present case?

d) To what extent should personnel at these institutions accommodate people’s prejudice      and baises, and to what extent should they not?

e)   Suppose the couple had requested that no one in the OR be male. Would that raise     the same kinds of issues?

f)   Since many decisions are made based on people’s comfort levels and preferences,      when should these become viewed as decisive to the acceptability of treatment?

g) Suppose the hospital refused to comply with the couple’s request, and there were no      other facilities in the area that would treat them either. (in fact, in the Nashville case,      they had sought care elsewhere, but were turned away because of their preconditions.)     If the woman would in all likelihood die as a result of failing to have the operation,      how would that affect the acceptability of the decision?

h) May we, in some circumstances, allow discrimination based on people’s race, sex or      belief?

i)    Could the surgeon have acted in some other manner that would respect the patient’s      wishes without violating the hospital’s policy?

Explanation / Answer

a) No, the surgeon did not.The surgeon did not take morally permissible action, because as per morals one should not discriminate the persons based on race, cast or sex.

b) Hospital people would have instructed about the morals of the hospital well before the wrong thing has occured. but still expressing the regret to the black perfusionist and condemning the actions of the doctor is right thing.

c) Surgeon's behavior is not consistent with the statements of hospital.

i. the position and mission statements are questionable, as they are not properly following it.

ii. the surgeon's behavior towards the black perfusionist is unacceptable as he asked him to step out of the operation room.

iii. the validity of the statements has to be checked thoroughly whether are they followed at every instance or not.

d) peoples' prejudices and biases can be accommodated upto the extent of material things not to the extent of persons and their emotions.

e) yes, sex discrimination in terms of the health care activities creates so many problems in the treatment, but if the patient's choice of persons are available it can be considered, since it is not problematic much regarding emotions.

f) If the person's health care problem is very much negligeble, if it can be treated by any person, and if the relevant choice of persons are available, and if the choice is not disclosed to the public then it may be acceptable, but still as per the socially and emotionally and ethically developing society it should not be encouraged.

g) If the hospital is strictly following the socio-moral norms, and if these norms are not acceptable to few people and if they are not having respect towards the developed norms of the society and hospital and if they are compelling on their biases to be implemented against the norms of the hospital, then hospital cannot become responsible for the negative result of this decision. otherwise, if the hospital allows the patients' biased decision, remaining many people will also start posing their biased views and make the remaining working nature under threat and problematic condition.

h) We should not allow discrimination based on people's belief or race. based on sex can be acceptable at some extent, if choice of people are available, if not available one should not put the health of individual at risk.

i) yes, the doctor should have councelled the patient properly and should have made them understand with the norms of the hospital as well as the emotions of the black perfusionist.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse I
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.