Asclepius Patton is a military nurse, approached by his superior Col. Ratchet, to take a position overseeing interrogation of prisoners of war. Patton is struggling with which decision, pertaining to this offer, whether listen to his ethical beliefs, or ignore his morals and accept this position.
In this case study there are five ethical issues in which I find. 1. Is it right to take care of injuries that are sustained by the interrogation? 2. Is it right to even continue working, when knowledge on the type of interrogation is known? 3. Is it right to give confidential information about the prisoners away, to be used against them? 4. Is it right to falsify reports of prisoner care, hiding the abuse and or even death? 5. Is it right to compromise your moral principles to help advance yourself in your career? Do you compromise your moral principles to advance yourself in your career is the central ethical issue to be resolved in this scenario, what do you do? Do you do what you feel is correct and not take the job offer and get out of the predicament, or do you turn a cheek and act as if what is happening needs to happen, and does not pose a problem to you? And do not pay any attention to the oath of commitment you give to your patients as if they personally do not matter? If it gets you where you want to be in your career. Research(2)
Source: Nurses code of conduct: This is relevant to the scenario at hand due to this is the “oath” nurses must take pertaining to the patient care in which they give. With in the nurses code of conduct it states, “ that the nurse in all professional relationships, practices with compassion and respect for the inherent dignity, worth and uniqueness of every individual, unrestricted by considerations of social and economic status, personal attributes, or the nature of health problems” (American Nurses Association [ANA], 2001). The Nurses Code of Conduct summarizes what Patton should do; under his “oath” he took he needs to care for patients in the most professional matter, no matter what situation the patient is in. With this oath he is there to protect the patients and provide the utmost care possible for those in need. It shows what decision he should make without even thinking. Source: Geneva Convention (military code of conduct): The Geneva Convention states that the, “ill-treatment of prisoners of war, even for the purpose of eliciting information deemed vital to self defense, has ben long considered a violation of the law of war” (Congressional Research Service [CRS], 2004). All of the military read and are well known of this military code of conduct before, and as they are signing up to protect our country, so for one to go against it really shows ones character. The statement explaining no Ill-Treatment should be afflicted to prisoners of war, shows that what the government/CIA is doing in this situation is deemed wrong, from that of which is stated in the Geneva Convention. The practice of torture was banned before the Civil War. With this information stated it helps shines light on the situation, and with Patton being a nurse asked to take care of these prisoners shows that the rules are not being thoroughly followed. Being as Patton is a military nurse, and Col. Ratchet asked this of Patton, supervising the torture, bring the military code of conduct into play. Source: Red Cross Code of Ethics: The Red Cross code of ethics pertains to the scenario at hand due to it being a non-profit relief organization. It helps support those in need, and would not agree with the fact of interrogation (torture) being inflicted upon these prisoners. In the code of conduct it touches base on retaliation, yes that of past or present coworkers but also that of just people (volunteers). The Red Cross was brought into the scenario when publishing a report...