|
medpundit |
||
 |
 |
|
Thursday, September 05, 2002The case also raises questions of medical ethics and a doctor's responsibilities to a criminal who needs medical treatment, a question rekindled four years ago when Senator Bill Frist, the Tennessee Republican who is also a doctor, treated the gunman who killed two Capitol Hill police officers. Medical ethics isn’t the issue at all. If Dr. Mudd had contented himself with merely treating the assassin rather than giving both Booth and an accomplice shelter and transportaion, then it would be a matter of ethics. This is hardly a Senator Frist situation. The Senator provided care for a wounded man, without regard to who he was, which is what a doctor should do. He did not provide him a means to escape the law. Dr. Mudd can't even claim the moral high ground of Captain Blood. The fictional Captain Blood, you may recall, was a physician in 17th century England who was drawn unwittingly into a revolt against the King. He was summoned to treat a wounded man who turned out to be a rebel, was arrested with his patient, and sent to the West Indies as a white slave. Embittered by the experience, he became a pirate. (Although one with a good heart.) If Captain Blood had been written as a character who meant to aid the rebels in their cause, as Dr. Mudd did, the story would have lost all of its poignancy. There appears to be a common misconception these days that medical charity means sanctuary from the law. Witness the Seattle hospital that refuses to discourage criminal behavior within its own walls. That notion needs to be disabused. True medical charity is to provide medical care without prejudice, not to forgive sins and trespasses. No one benefits, not our patients, not society, when we enable bad behavior. As for Dr. Mudd, he clearly stepped over the line when he gave John Wilkes Booth horses to make his escape. He wasn’t acting as a doctor caring for a wounded man when he did that. His descendants claim that he hadn’t yet heard of Lincoln’s death. That’s hard to believe. He lived in Maryland, close enough to Washington for a wounded man to make his way to him without a horse. Word travels fast, even in those days - especially when it’s word of such import as a President’s murder. I happen to be reading the diary of Betsy Freemantle, the wife of a naval captain during the Napoleonic Wars. She records learning of the Battle of Trafalgar on November 7, 1805, one day after the Admiralty learned of it - even though she lived far from London. Surely the United States in the late 1860’s was capable of transmitting news just as fast, if not faster. Dr. Mudd was no Captain Blood. posted by Sydney on 9/05/2002 05:25:00 AM 0 comments 0 Comments: |
|
