Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mrab 4604 days ago
In this circumstance, I hate to defend those that did what they did. The comment above about authoritarian followers is a good explanation as to why the officers/medical staff would comply. But I could see how one would comply, not to serve or aid, but out of fear or simply the with the perception that they _had_ to comply.
2 comments

Doctors command an astounding level of respect and trust, and both are necessary for their profession to even exist. If I cannot trust a doctor while I am unconscious or otherwise vulnerable, then I would be putting myself at risk by avoiding seeking medical help if it became necessary. That level of trust is so high, I don't think it would be a stretch to think many people would expect a doctor to put a patient's needs and wellbeing above their own.

These doctors may have risked their livelihoods or their freedom by refusing to comply, but they knew full well the actual harm they would do if they did comply. They should be held accountable.

These doctors may have risked their livelihoods or their freedom by refusing to comply

Yeah, no. The first doctor is home right now, sleeping well, knowing s/he did the right thing by refusing to comply. The cops didn't have shit, the second hospital doctors completely abdicated their responsibilities absent any compelling interest and they went along with it because they wanted to, because they found a good enough reason. How do I know? Because the existence of the first doctor(s) proves they could have said "no."

When the cops haul a man in for "standing funny", anything you do to oppose their will is painting a target on your back.

The first doctor got away with it because the other doctors went along with the officers' demands. If everyone had refused they would have been ethically in the right, but you can be assured the authorities would have reacted far less favorably.

They went to a different hospital. That's not just turning to the next guy. The doctor at the first hospital explicitly refused on ethical grounds and did not get any unfavorable repercussions from the authorities, which completely refutes your point.
Except that the first hospital had no guarantee that there would be no consequences, which completely refutes your point.
There are no guarantees, ever, so I'm not sure what you're saying here.
Do you know any medical personnel? They guard their licenses tightly and know exactly how they could be vulnerable. These people aren't stupid and have a culture versed in telling cops to back off. Note that the first doctor(s) they went to said, "no."

Just because you can see how they would comply says more about you than them.