Perplexing Ethical Questions No One Has Solved

In some cases, the same attitude can be right and wrong at the same time. Situations like this usually raise ethical questions and, regardless of the option you choose, it can always be put in check.

In this post, the awesome.club presents some ethical issues that are considered crucial by society, and that have been unresolved for years.

Many doctors and people of other professions tattoo on their bodies the inscription “Do not resuscitate” or “Do not intubate”🇧🇷

This means that if the subject is taken to the hospital, he does not want his chest cut open and his heart massaged. He also doesn’t want to be electrocuted or intubated.

When a doctor finds such an inscription, he faces an unlikely task: determining whether the tattoo serves as a legal document or is simply a worthless inscription. In 2012, there was a case where a man got a similar phrase tattooed for losing a bet, but fortunately the documents confirmed that he really wanted to live and be resurrected.

Another case occurred in 2017, when a 70-year-old man was brought to the hospital unconscious, in shock and without documents. All he had was the tattoo: “Do not resuscitate”. Before providing medical assistance, physicians had to call a consultant, who determined that the enrollment might actually be the patient’s desire.

But the question of these tattoos can be even more controversial. A person’s family can sue the doctor who refused to treat someone based on the application. On the other hand, the patient can also wake up and sue the professionals when he discovers that his wish was not respected. Like this, the doctor is at a dead end.

What would you do in the doctors shoes?

It is important to point out that, here in BrazilO civil Code prohibits the disposal of one’s own body when this implies a reduction in physical integrity or violates good customs. In theory, this rule would allow a doctor to intervene in a victim regardless of what is written on the tattoo without running the risk of having to indemnify that victim or his next of kin later.

And, 1982, a man named Andrew Wilson shot and killed a guard during a coffee shop robbery. Soon, the people of the region, wanting to receive the announced reward, identified another person, Elton Logan, as the criminal.

Either way, Wilson ended up in jail for another homicide. And he confessed to the first murder only to his lawyers, knowing that professional secrecy would not allow them to tell anyone. These attorneys were present at Logan’s trial. If the man had been sentenced to death, Wilson’s supporters could break professional secrecy to save the man’s life. But that’s not what happened: Elton Logan was sentenced to life in prison.

Wilson died in 2007, and only then were his lawyers able to reveal the secret and get Logan out of jail in 2008. By then, the man had already spent nearly half of his life in prison.

What would you do if you were in the lawyers shoes?

In Brazil, professional secrecy is ensured by the Constitution and the Statute of Advocacy.

Before a new drug goes on sale, it must undergo a series of clinical trials during which the substance is given to a certain group of people, while another group receives a placebo.

Laws in many countries prohibit these tests on pregnant women. That is, doctors cannot administer anything to a pregnant woman, even if the woman’s life depends on it, if the medicine has not been tested. Thus, we are faced with a choice: give the unauthorized medicine to the woman or test the substance in her own body. In both cases, not one, but two people could die.

What choice would you make?