who should an emergency room treat (given only the choices allowed)

[SivaGanesha 2]

Given only the two patients listed as options--both of whom come to an emergency room at the same time with similar life-threatening conditions--who should the hospital treat first?

Just to clarify: the doctors are bound by the Hippocratic oath to treat at least one person, and they are bound by the constraints of the available resources to prioritize. Who should get the priority?

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[dreamdancer 0]

do either of them skydive?

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[rehmwa 2]

One word - Triage

help with the spelling please - Tree-ahj

therefore, the one in the most dire straights that can still be saved

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[dreamdancer 0]

if one of them was really old - i would say the younger

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

One word - Triage

If having medical insurance isn't going to make any difference as to quality of care when it really matters, what is the point of spending money on medical insurance?

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

do either of them skydive?

Let's assume they are both suffering from similar skydiving-related injuries.

Does this affect your answer?

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[Andy9o8 0]

Neither of them. Don't have insurance? Fuck em. Personal responsibility. Why should I have to pay for some freeloader? Illegal immigrants? Fuck em twice. And fuck the insurance companies that enable them by insuring them. Next thing you know they'll want to marry your daughters.

[dreamdancer 0]

it makes it much trickier

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[quade 3]

Crappy hypotheticals are . . . crappy.

In any real situation one of them is going to be in a more serious and time critical condition. That is the person that is treated first unless it is completely obvious that no amount of treatment will save the person's life.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Just to clarify: the doctors are bound by the Hippocratic oath to treat at least one person,

(Seriously...) No, aside from reasonable medical triage considerations, if both patients need treatment in order to survive, but are not so far gone that their death is not already very likely, then the doctors' ethical standards would require them to treat both patients.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

Crappy hypotheticals are . . . crappy.

In any real situation one of them is going to be in a more serious and time critical condition. That is the person that is treated first unless it is completely obvious that no amount of treatment will save the person's life.

In other words you are claiming that a policy of "to each according to his/her need"--in other words a socialist policy--is always going to be applied in medical circumstances where it really matters.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[rushmc 18]

Didnt vote but, they will treat anybody who comes to the door with a life threatening injury, as it should be.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Crappy hypotheticals are . . . crappy.

In any real situation one of them is going to be in a more serious and time critical condition. That is the person that is treated first unless it is completely obvious that no amount of treatment will save the person's life.

In other words you are claiming that a policy of "to each according to his/her need"--in other words a socialist policy--is always going to be applied in circumstances where it really matters.

No. I'm saying that the policy of "do whatever makes the most sense" is the best one.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Quote

One word - Triage

If having medical insurance isn't going to make any difference as to quality of care when it really matters, what is the point of spending money on medical insurance?

They only have to provide emergency repair - stop the bleeding, splint your bones. They don't have to perform surgeries or provide physical therapy that will help you regain full function.

They also don't have to do it for free. When you have nothing to collect that doesn't matter, although having a job, savings, etc. makes you vulnerable.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

No. I'm saying that the policy of "do whatever makes the most sense" is the best one.

Wouldn't it always make more sense to treat the one with insurance because then the hospital--because they will then be reimbursed--will have more resources to treat others with similar injuries in the future?

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[billvon 2,417]

Whoever will die without it. If they come in at different times, it's whoever came in first. If they come in at the same time, it's the luck of the draw.

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

No. I'm saying that the policy of "do whatever makes the most sense" is the best one.

Wouldn't it always make more sense to treat the one with insurance because then the hospital--because they will then be reimbursed--will have more resources to treat others with similar injuries in the future?

Only to people that only care about money.

If you're willing to actually put a price on life and let that be your only consideration . . . I hope you also believe there is a God that will forgive you later.

I won't.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jclalor 12]

To many variables, First there are very few hospitals that could only handle one serious case at a time. Second is it a poor elderly American on borrowed time or 6 year old "illegal" child?
The problems with hospitals and illegals is not the life threatining conditions but all the illegal people that come to the ER with the sniffles.
For all these people that would deny life saving treatment to illegals, and on average are the right winger christian type, once again completly ignore the basic tenants of the teachings of their hero Jesus.

[Andy9o8 0]

Who would Jesus treat?*
That's who the doctors should treat.











*Of course, being a carpenter, he'd probably just saw their legs off.

[shropshire 0]

Skydiving Dr : The one with the nicest tits

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[DJL 232]

Both. Any issue that someone has with their immigrantion status or socioeconomic status should be dealt with afterwards.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[Skyrad 0]

The answer is simple. The one with the most urgent clinical need that will respond to treatment. Making a decision based on nationality and ability to pay is a symptom of a facist society.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

Who would Jesus treat?*
That's who the doctors should treat.

*Of course, being a carpenter, he'd probably just saw their legs off.

Ergo Jesus was an Orthopod (and Orthopods think they're Jesus)

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

Given only the two patients listed as options--both of whom come to an emergency room at the same time with similar life-threatening conditions--who should the hospital treat first?

Just to clarify: the doctors are bound by the Hippocratic oath to treat at least one person, and they are bound by the constraints of the available resources to prioritize. Who should get the priority?

A very US-centric question. This is not a US web site, you know.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[baronn 111]

The choice should not have to be made. They should both be treated. How can a world where we have the capability to overcome almost any obstacle, have to make such a basic decision? Everyone has an opinion until it might be them on the table. Funny how that changes it. This is not a problem in other countries. Health care has turned into a business that exists for profit. Is that really what it's about? How this country can spend the massive amounts of money on wars, pork laden projects and ridiculous benefits for elected officials is nothing short of criminal. We are quickly rushing towards a catastrophe. This is how gov.'s are toppled. And should be. Only when everyone unites will things change. The reason the chinese are doing what they're doing, is not because they're a bunch of kind-hearted commies. No, they don't want to end up on a meathook in the middle of Tiannemen square. Let's take a second look @ this and really consider what's important. How productive could we be if we didn't have to worry about what should be basic human needs? If a country wants to expand and prosper, they need to create a place where this can exist. Look at the success of Google and see how they treat their employees. Can't a country do this? An effective national healthcare program is long overdue and should be here now. Check out the movie"Sicko" to see how it really works in other countries. We have been fed a(nother) bunch of lies and are being led to the slaughter. Time to stop this.