Point:Wars must be won if our country … is to be protected from unthinkable outcomes, as the events on September 11th most recently illustrated…. This best protection unequivocally requires armed forces having military physicians committed to doing what is required to secure victory…. As opposed to needing neutral physicians, we need military physicians who can and do identify as closely as possible with the military so that they, too, can carry out the vital part they play in meeting the needs of the mission.Counterpoint:We believe the role of the “physician–soldier” to be an inherent moral impossibility because the military physician, in an environment of military control, is faced with the difficult problems of mixed agency that include obligations to the “fighting strength” and … “national security.”This paper is based on the Dual Loyalty Project (1998–2000), which was funded by the Greenwall Foundation to develop guidelines that protect the human rights of patients in situations where health professionals face dual loyalty conflicts. The intellectual contributions of the International Dual Loyalty Working Group, as well as the assistance of Ms. Kathy Mallinson and Dr. Joanne Stevens in preparing this manuscript are gratefully acknowledged.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
London et al. (2006) studied this question.