4 ms·

Argh I don't know enough abut medical ethics to know where the line is but for all the people rejoicing in the guy resigning, losing his license, being convicte

Argh I don't know enough abut medical ethics to know where the line is but for all the people rejoicing in the guy resigning, losing his license, being convicted of a crime, or any other horrible outcome ... Please, please, really consider what it means to ruin someone's life when advocating for a certain punishment. There's a whole range of reactions between "eh, no big deal" and "destroy his career!" Whatever the man did, what he didn't do was kill anyone or permanently curtail someone's professional life or put someone in a cell for days/months/years. All of the punishments discussed also remove a functioning surgeon from being a contributing member of society. I'm just saying, it's worth thinking about. I feel like we all get so self-righteous and don't think about how much impact these punishments have. It's like, a friend of mine always argued we should really bring back public spanking. Sounds like a joke, but her point was there should be a type of punishment that is the equivalent of society yelling a whole bunch at you very very sternly and making you feel very very embarrassed and then you moving on with your life and continuing to contribute to society.

dEnigma 9y ago
No matter where the line is, "branding a patient's liver" is clearly on the wrong side of it. I agree that the appropriate response is not "branding" the guy in return, by making sure his name is so tarnished that he'll never get a proper job again, but there has to be a strong reaction to what he's done. If he just gets a slap on the wrist he's probably tempted to do something similar again (since there seems to be some urge inside of him that made him do it in the first place).
thaumasiotes 9y ago
> Whatever the man did, what he didn't do was kill anyone or permanently curtail someone's professional life or put someone in a cell for days/months/years. I don't have much of a problem with very severe punishments for things that (1) the person knew they weren't supposed to do; and (2) can't be done by accident. > her point was there should be a type of punishment that is the equivalent of society yelling a whole bunch at you very very sternly and making you feel very very embarrassed and then you moving on with your life and continuing to contribute to society This sounds more like the stocks than a public spanking (spanking?). A public shaming works better when everyone agrees on what's shameful. As soon as you have groups who honor getting thrown in the stocks, a lot of the point of throwing people in the stocks disappears.
jacquesm 9y ago
I know enough about medical ethics that this guy is lucky to get away with just losing his license, being convicted of a crime would be a nice touch. Keep in mind that you're on an operating table, passed out and 100% dependent on those working on you. To treat you like a graffiti wall is not only disrespectful, it wastes time under narcosis which carries some minimal risk, and potentially could lead to complications (though not related, complications were the reason this was discovered in the first place). Let's say that treating this guy like a trendsetter would definitely not have my vote. I've been operated on a couple of times in my life and I'm pretty sure that the surgeons that did that would be far more angry about this than a patient ever would be because this guy damaged all of the medical profession for his personal gratification.
giomasce 9y ago
It seems to me that this form of "public spanking" would really earn the opposite of what you claim for: when you leave the judgement to the crowd, you are basically fomenting hatred and revenge (because for some psychological reason in such a case every one feels entitled to have a revenge, even when they are not involved in the case), which in turns leads to a punishment that cannot be controlled any more. This is why judgement should be left to professionals that (should) take the appropriate time to listen to both parties, review the legal basis and take a well-thought decision, trying to not put too much feeling in it. I'm not claiming this works perfectly, but it is definitely better that leaving the matter to the crowd. There are many cases of people whose guilty-appearing position was overexposed, for example by media, later proving innocent or less culpable that the initial situation might have suggested, but condemned forever to unjust public shaming. On the act itself, I am in the number of those who think this should be taken extremely seriously and it is good ground for losing the license and criminal charges. Scarring someone's body (against their own will) has been for long (and until a few decades ago) a sign of property and slavery, and although I do not think this was what this surgeon intended, it still must be considered an extreme humiliation. Also, a surgeon's professional position usually entails an important amount of responsibilities and power, so violation of the public's trust in them are very important matter.

dEnigma 9y ago

No matter where the line is, "branding a patient's liver" is clearly on the wrong side of it. I agree that the appropriate response is not "branding" the guy in return, by making sure his name is so tarnished that he'll never get a proper job again, but there has to be a strong reaction to what he's done. If he just gets a slap on the wrist he's probably tempted to do something similar again (since there seems to be some urge inside of him that made him do it in the first place).

thaumasiotes 9y ago

> Whatever the man did, what he didn't do was kill anyone or permanently curtail someone's professional life or put someone in a cell for days/months/years. I don't have much of a problem with very severe punishments for things that (1) the person knew they weren't supposed to do; and (2) can't be done by accident. > her point was there should be a type of punishment that is the equivalent of society yelling a whole bunch at you very very sternly and making you feel very very embarrassed and then you moving on with your life and continuing to contribute to society This sounds more like the stocks than a public spanking (spanking?). A public shaming works better when everyone agrees on what's shameful. As soon as you have groups who honor getting thrown in the stocks, a lot of the point of throwing people in the stocks disappears.

jacquesm 9y ago

I know enough about medical ethics that this guy is lucky to get away with just losing his license, being convicted of a crime would be a nice touch. Keep in mind that you're on an operating table, passed out and 100% dependent on those working on you. To treat you like a graffiti wall is not only disrespectful, it wastes time under narcosis which carries some minimal risk, and potentially could lead to complications (though not related, complications were the reason this was discovered in the first place). Let's say that treating this guy like a trendsetter would definitely not have my vote. I've been operated on a couple of times in my life and I'm pretty sure that the surgeons that did that would be far more angry about this than a patient ever would be because this guy damaged all of the medical profession for his personal gratification.

giomasce 9y ago

It seems to me that this form of "public spanking" would really earn the opposite of what you claim for: when you leave the judgement to the crowd, you are basically fomenting hatred and revenge (because for some psychological reason in such a case every one feels entitled to have a revenge, even when they are not involved in the case), which in turns leads to a punishment that cannot be controlled any more. This is why judgement should be left to professionals that (should) take the appropriate time to listen to both parties, review the legal basis and take a well-thought decision, trying to not put too much feeling in it. I'm not claiming this works perfectly, but it is definitely better that leaving the matter to the crowd. There are many cases of people whose guilty-appearing position was overexposed, for example by media, later proving innocent or less culpable that the initial situation might have suggested, but condemned forever to unjust public shaming. On the act itself, I am in the number of those who think this should be taken extremely seriously and it is good ground for losing the license and criminal charges. Scarring someone's body (against their own will) has been for long (and until a few decades ago) a sign of property and slavery, and although I do not think this was what this surgeon intended, it still must be considered an extreme humiliation. Also, a surgeon's professional position usually entails an important amount of responsibilities and power, so violation of the public's trust in them are very important matter.