- © 2007 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors
I read with interest the Salon article by Ken Walker.1 I am concerned that Walker reduces the discussion about the case of the recent birth of conjoined twins in British Columbia to an argument about the expected health care costs.
In my view, we as physicians should first discuss ethical considerations. The twins' mother refused to have an abortion: Should her physicians or society have forced her to have the procedure without her consent? Now that the twins have been born, to what amount of health care and social services (if any) are they entitled? Who is qualified to ascertain the quality of their life?
If we focus solely on monetary issues in discussing this case, does this mean that all decisions about whether or not to treat patients should be based primarily on the expected costs of treatment? We need to consider whether Walker's way of thinking fits with our own attitudes and beliefs about what it means to be a physician.
Footnotes
-
Competing interests: None declared.
REFERENCE
- 1.↵