MILITARY MEDICINE 2002; 167, Suppl. 3: 26 - 31
Medical Ethics in Peace and in
the Armed Conflict
Guarantor: LTC Andreas G. Schapowal
Contributors: LTC Andreas G. Schapowal, German Armed Forces; COL Hans-Ulrich
Baer, Swiss Armed Forces
Global medical ethics on the basis of the General Declaration of Human
Rights by the United Nations is a key subject for the 21st century. World
Health Organization's new definition of health includes "spiritual
health", a term that has to be defined in international consensus
despite different anthropologies, cultures, and religions. Old issues
in medical ethics such as assisted suicide are still waiting for global
consensus among the "pro-life" and "pro-choice" parties.
So far the Netherlands and Belgium are the only countries where euthanasia
has been legalized, whereas the U.S. Supreme Court has denied a right
of medically assisted suicide. The respect of nature is also the basis
for guidelines in new issues in medical ethics such as gene therapy and
human cloning, which are controversially discussed. Military medical ethics
should provide regulations for morally correct decisions in armed conflicts
including the war against international terrorism and in peacekeeping
missions. Triage of the wounded, distribution of medical aid, and critical
incident stress debriefing for soldiers and their relatives are key issues.
Introduction: Definition of Ethics
Ethics is the branch of philosophy concerned with the study of those
concepts we use to evaluate human activities, in particular the concepts
of goodness and obligation. Philosophical schools can be divided into
schools that regard ethical language as being descriptive and those that
regard it as being prescriptive. Descriptive theories of ethics seek to
define the meaning of good either in terms of non-moral characteristics
(naturalism) , in terms of metaphysical constructions, or in terms of
moral notions that are considered to have a special and peculiar character
of their own. Important among the prescriptive theories is the view that
ethical language is used to appeal not to the intellect, but to the emotions,
showing that a person's moral feelings arouse and are designed to arouse
similar feelings in others. Other prescriptive theories are those that
define ethical terms as carrying mandatory force, enjoined by some kind
of authority, divine or otherwise. A special case was Emmanuel Kant's
theory of the categorical imperative, according to which the prescriptive
force of moral action hinges on the criterion of whether the principle
involved could become a universal maxim. So far there is no global consensus
in philosophy for a definition of "good.
In our opinion, in identifying the meaning of a human action, the intention
is decisive. From this viewpoint we are able to distinguish in moral philosophy
between good - bad, right - wrong, helpful - harmful, wholesome - unwholesome.
Global Ethics for a Global Community
At the beginning of the 21st century, we are realizing that the world
has grown smaller and the world's people have become almost one community
interdependent in large multinational groups, in global economy, industry,
and trade with worldwide communications eliminating nearly every ancient
barrier of distance, language, and face. We also share the same grave
problems: overpopulation, dwindling natural resources, environmental pollution
threatening our air, water, and food, and the elimination of life forms
minute by minute.
There is a common ethical basis of all world religions in which believers
of different religions and also nonbelievers or agnostics can agree: respect
of nature and humanity. No matter whether we believe in the sayings of
Confucius, the discourses of Buddha, the Torah, the Sermon on the Mount,
or any other religion or pseudo-religion, we as human beings all desire
happiness and do not want suffering. Furthermore, each of us has an equal
right to pursue these goals.
In Europe, this was reflected in the philosophical discussions before
and during the French Revolution and expressed in the Declaration of Human
Rights in 1789, renewed worldwide in the General Declaration of Human
Rights of the United Nations.
Definition of Health
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines health in its preamble as
"a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, not
merely the absence of disease or infirmity. The enjoyment of the highest
attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every
human being." In January 1998, the WHO Executive Board adopted a
resolution requesting that this definition of health be changed to "Health
is a dynamic state of complete physical, mental, spiritual, and social
well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." The
WHO General Assembly has still to agree to extend the
definition of health to the spiritual level .
Globalization of Health Ethics
Moral commitments to protect individual health go back thousands of years
to ancient Hindu Samihita medical ethics, the Japanese Rhi-Shu code of
medicine, and the Greek Hippocratic Oath. In Hippocratic medicine, the
therapeutic relationship was grounded on the moral principle of philanthropia:
"where there is love of man (philantropia), there is the love of
the art of healing (philotechnia). The link between religious beliefs
and medical ethics also has well-established historical roots. For instance,
Buddhist scriptures frequently referred to the Buddha as the "Great
Physician. In the bible, Christus Medicus acts very much in the
same way. Contemporary bioethics are based on the Ethical Guidelines of
the World Medical Association, examples of which are the Declaration of
Geneva and the Declaration of Helsinki [2-4].
Presuming that it is every medical doctor's task and aim to maintain,
improve or restore his patients' health using aIl possible efforts, this
new definition of health has many implications for the education, ethics,
and daily practice of doctors no matter in which field or country they
Our universities and medical schools offer a high standard of medical
education. The medical student's obligation is to study hard and gain
as much knowledge of the human body and its functions, as well as of pathogenesis
and salutogenesis as possible. The qualified doctor has a duty that is
to consider himself an eternal student and must ensure that by reading
scientific journals and attending scientific meetings and postgraduate
courses, he maintains a high standard of the increasingly subtle body
of knowledge, at least in his field of specialization.
Doctors must know about the mind and its functions as well as about the
interdependent relationship between the body and the mind. This is every
doctor's obligation. Leaving the mental level to the psychiatrist would
allow only a very poor and limited understanding of the human being, in
general, and the patient's needs, in particular.
In the developing world, addressing the basic health needs of a country's
poorest citizens is the first step toward reducing the level of poverty.
Tuberculosis, malaria, and human immunodeficiency virus remain the most
pressing global challenges in the context of diseases that are caused
by poverty. How can medical doctors, businesses, governments, and international
organizations join together to attack the diseases that continue to afflict
the poor and that prevent greater socioeconomic development?
In the developed countries, with the arrival of genetic screening, gene
technology, and telemedicine, health care practices are set to change
considerably in the next few years. What real advances can we expect from
new methods and treatments? Will new health care systems further empower
patients or diminish their influence?
Social commitment should be an integral component of the medical profession.
Social responsibility ranges from such goals as commitment to a fair health
system in one's own country, to the involvement in the improvement of
working conditions, to questions of global distribution of health resources,
and the commitment for a healthy environment suitable for human beings,
animals, and plants [5, 6].
Within the WHO, there is a movement towards globalization of public health
ethics . The WHO works for continued and strengthened
application of ethics to health policy, research and service provision,
implementation of equity-orientated policies, and incorporation of a gender
perspective into health policies and strategies. Doing good in public
health would include investment in global research, surveillance, and
development aimed at protecting aIl from infectious diseases, and controls
on exports of products hazardous to health, in particular tobacco, hazardous
wastes, contaminated food products, hazardous chemicals,
illegal drugs, and weapons .
Spirituality seeks the ultimate truth beyond our superficial material
world. In different cultures and nations, mankind has devised various
religions with their different anthropologies. All religions can agree
on global ethics . Global medical ethics can be accepted
as well by doctors who do not feel affiliated with any religion. Indeed,
it is the support for universal values that is the core of an major religions
and also agnostics that links us together through the whole world community.
Common to that core is the injunction expressed clearly by all major religions
and philosophical schools as well that we should not do unto others
as we would not have them do unto us" [10 12].
Good medical and good scientific judgement requires much more than scientific
and medical knowledge, analytical, and surgical skills. It also needs
every doctors and scientist's integrity, which comes with courage
and character on the right ethical basis. To try to implement the right
medical ethics in each single medical student, ethics should be part of
the medical curricula at all universities worldwide.
Three features are needed to be a good doctor or scientist committed to
improving the state of health: altruism, wisdom, and compassion.
The mental faults of ignorance, hatred, and greed should be erased from
one's mind. The medical doctor should be happy and thankful for the opportunity
to help and serve other beings, which makes his profession one of the
most precious of all.
To seek the best possible knowledge of medicine and to develop a peaceful
and altruistic mind is the right basis to maintain or restore health in
patients. This includes a clear understanding of the basis of suffering,
death, and life after death. An important quality in this context is mindfulness,
being aware of the consequences of our decisions and actions.
Loving kindness should be the basis of a doctor's behaviour. The motivation
should not be to become well-known, respected, famous, rich, or whatever
other worldly values could be achieved but exclusively to help others
as best as possible. The ongoing discussion in western countries about
the salary of medical doctors is counterproductive. Working continuously
for the well-being of others will bring much more benefit to one's own
spiritual continuum than anything else. By not giving priority to selfish
and monetary aspects, doctors will recover lost ground in their patients
esteem and make a very good first step toward a health care system affordable
for the global interdependent society.
Actuality of Medical Ethics
In the 20th century and right now we can note significant scientific
advances in the fields of natural sciences and medicine. Nevertheless,
the sum of diseases seems to have remained the same. Many people watch
with growing sorrow the endangerment of their living conditions not only
by less stringent requirements for a healthy environment, the unlimited
exploitation of non-renewable resources, rapid increase in population,
but also newly appearing pathogens such as human immunodeficiency virus
and prions. After the World Trade Centre and Pentagon tragedy on September
11, 2001, there is a new quality and quantity of anxiety because of the
globalization of terrorism and the physical and mental war against this
Unsolved problems in the history of medicine such as abortion and euthanasia,
new challenges such as organ transplantation, fertilization, gene research,
technology, and therapy up to human cloning are waiting for answers of
medical ethics. In all industrialized countries, the explosion of costs
in the health services led to financial problems and to increased state
regulation not only in the area of clinical medicine hut also more and
more in the field of outpatient medical care. In a mechanized world doctors
must fight against allowing the medical profession to degenerate to a
repairer of the biological "human machine". Doctors have to
learn from the history of Hitler Germany to never again let ourselves
fall into a "medicine without humaneness" - as the German philosopher
Alexander Mitscherlich put it, to become accomplices of criminal human
experiments and industrialized mass extermination ordered by the state
and obviously tolerated by the majority of the population. We should never
forget that during the Holocaust in the Third Reich" by the
state doctrine of forms of life without any worth for the German race
over 6,000,000 million Jews, Gypsies, and many others including 70,273
patients from German psychiatric clinics have been killed. There are always
new powerful leaders misguided by their egoism and insane suffering from
megalomania showing up like Slobodan Milosevic or Osama bin Laden as recent
It is one of the greatest achievements of last century's science to decode
herbal, animal, and even the human genome and in cloning everything in
every possible way. We are looking forward to be able to clone organs
like kidneys, livers, lungs, hearts, and skin from the individual patient's
own cells. We do hope to be able to heal gene-related diseases like cystic
fibrosis. In the pharmaceutical industry, vaccines against acquired immunodeficiency
syndrome, malaria, and tuberculosis, reproducible in the highest standard,
unlimited amounts, reasonable costs, and the distribution worldwide in
terms of health for all are hopefully at the horizon. Genetically modified
food resistant to parasites, bacteria, viruses, and moulds are advertised
by the food industry.
Yet there are, with good reason, public fears watching the advances of
the genetic revolution. Will we have blood tests and gene mapping right
after birth? We know that over the course of the last 10 years hundreds
of thousands genetically mutated animals have been born. What about human
genes added to cows, sheep, rabbits, and fish? What about mice genes in
medication produced by recombinant techniques? What about retroviruses?
What about, to mention the worst case, the serious and recently successful
attempts made to clone humans? Will designer families be the reality for
tomorrow? Will we even have soldiers cloned some not too far times? Think
of the nightmare of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World to become true in
Respecting nature is the key answer to all ethical reasoning in this field,
and the public eye has to watch the advances and proceedings in genetic
engineering as actually in stem cell research. The aim must be to maintain
the integrity of the human genome for our as well as future generations.
There is a need of:
- international consensus on ethics, which will lead to international
- making national laws on the basis of these international guidelines,
- transparency in public via media.
The actual discussion and recent laws in Switzerland may be a good example:
Swiss Gene Lex
- checks every single case,
- respects nature and biodiversity, and
- makes the producer responsible for any adverse event for mankind
or environment for 30 years, which of course raises questions of economical
risks, insurance rates, rentability, and industrial options of doing
research and production abroad where there are either no regulations
or more permissive ones.
Conflict between "Pro-Life" and "Pro-Choice" Parties
Another very important field to watch and to carefully consider is the
ongoing discussion of euthanasia and its regulation in the Netherlands
allowing medically assisted death to a far extent, whereas there are much
more cautious discussions, legal regulation, and court decisions for example
in the United States and the United Kingdom .
The "Pro-Life" party defines life as a divine creation or a
gift from the universe to the individuals to be respected like every form
of life and nature. Religious and natural law they say are protecting
human life from the beginning before birth and until natural death. In
the extreme position any form of action intended to abbreviate life, even
under a justification of ending unrelievable suffering, is banned.
The "pro-choice" party favors the individual deliberate choice
to govern the physical dignity of ones own life and death without being
bound to any collective ethics but only to the individual moral capability
of free decision-making.
The Dutch position in this matter is that medically assisted death is
allowed under the following conditions :
- requests for euthanasia must come only from the patient and must
be entirely free and voluntary,
- the patient's request must be well considered, explicit, enduring,
- the patient must be experiencing intolerable physical, mental, or
other suffering with no prospect of amelioration,
- euthanasia must be a last resort, alternatives to alleviate the patient's
condition having been considered and found wanting, such as by the patient's
- euthanasia must be performed by a physician, and
- the physician must have consulted with an independent physician who
has relevant experience.
So far no medical association, other than the Dutch and
Belgian, considers it appropriate for doctors to assist, either directly
or indirectly, with suicide.
In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to rule on the legality of a
Texas State Statute that made it a criminal offense for physicians to
perform abortions unless the mother's life was in danger. After reviewing
the matter of Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), a majority of the members
of the Court determined that within the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution
there exits a "right of privacy . A majority
of the members of the Court further determined that this "right of
privacy" left the decision whether to terminate a pregnancy through
abortion up to the woman after consultation with her physician. A series
of "individual rights" cases followed Roe, including Cruzan
v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (1990), in which
the U.S. Supreme Court held that an individual had a right to require
medical authorities to withdraw life-sustaining treatment. The Court emphasized
that its determination was based on the ancient AngIo American principle
that "at common law, even the touching of one person by another without
consent and without legal justification was a battery. Cruzan, 497
U.S., at 269. The court further noted that medical treatment typically
requires informed consent and that generally a competent individual has
a right to refuse treatment. In 1994, applying the same type of logic,
the Supreme Court used in Roe, as well as their interpretation of Cruzan,
a group of terminally ill patients filed suit in the U.S. District Court
in Western Washington seeking to nullify a Washington State Statute that
prohibited assisted suicide. The District Court struck down the statute,
holding that it was an unconstitutional intrusion into "individual
rights" guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. On appeal, the District
Court decision was reversed by a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals. That decision was appealed to the full membership of
the 9th Circuit, which by a majority vote, overruled the original three-judge
panel, thus, reinstating the original District Court decision. The State
of Washington then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court (Washington v. Glucksberg,
521 U.S. 702, 1997). The U.S. Supreme Court noted that for over 700 years
AngIo-American common law has punished (through loss of all property to
government) or prohibited suicide in same fashion. The Court further noted
that the Washington State Statute expressly allowed for the withdrawal
or withholding of life-sustaining treatment, thus it complied with the
requirements of Cruzan. In the end the Court overruled the lower Courts,
deciding in essence, that although there are "individual rights"
in which the government cannot intrude, the government may "discourage"
the activity by prohibiting others from assisting.
On the other hand, there is a widespread agreement in ethical guidelines
of medical associations that doctors have a duty to try to provide patients
with a peaceful and dignified death with minimal suffering, which is of
course contradictory to the Dutch position of a doctor's role deliberately
to kill patients at their request. In this context, one has to be aware
of the fact that reducing pains by very potent drugs from classical morphine
up to more potent drugs like Fentanyl can lead to the abbreviation of
life as well.
Another widely discussed problem is the one of prolonging life in patients
who are forever completely unaware in a persistent vegetative state beyond
any hope of recovery and whose life therefore can only be prolonged by
continuous medical care, treatment. and artificial nutrition. Britain's
highest court, the House of Lords, decided in the case of Anthony Bland
in 1993 by majority vote that prolongation of his life by these means
served none of his interests. The key argument was the denial of present
and future characteristics of "personhood" to Anthony Bland
because of severe neurological damage. Withholding medical care in those
cases is dependent on the high court decision of the country and needs
always to be adapted to the individual case .
Military Medical Ethics
An important outcome of the Nuremberg Doctors' trials were ethical codes
in medicine, including not only the Nuremberg Code but also the Geneva
Convention and The Helsinki Declaration as well as subsequent resolutions.
We now have bioethics sections in many medical textbooks. Ethics committees
at state, scientific society, and university level constitute a solid
foundation for conducting research projects on animals and humans in an
ethically responsible way. However, there is no special military medical
ethics, and there are merely no ethical sections in the handbooks of military
The question "Why military medical ethics?" should be answered
by analyzing the real sources of armed conflicts. In a world where social,
cultural, and religious differences are in fact the abundant source of
armed conflicts, ethical considerations that transcend these differences
are called for. With military actions against dictators like Iraq's President
Saddam Hussein, Mr. Slobodan Milosevic, and the al Qaeda terrorists, new
forms of armed conflicts have arisen in recent years. Right now, the war
against international terrorism focuses our attention on an area of warfare
that traditionally has not been addressed by international law. Military
medical ethics in this context and understanding is an actual and global
key issue. As the law is always behind political events, conflicts, and
changes in a society's morals, ethical considerations should have a stable
foundation in humanity on the one hand and calculate and disclose possible
future issues in advance. In a global view, the question "What kind
of morals for the military?" should not be based on interest groups
or even national political leaders, whom, because of the nature of politics,
sometimes act only because of their immediate political needs; rather,
there should be binding regulations in international rules and law, the
best of which would be on the level of consensus of the United Nations
There are special issues in military medicine in the armed conflict qualitatively
different to medical ethics in general: the doctor-patient relationship,
the triage of the wounded, and the interface between stress-related disorders
of soldiers and ethics.
Doctor-Patient Relationship and Triage
In medical ethics, the old paternalistic doctor-patient relationship
seeing all the knowledge and competence and therefore the decision making
as well on the doctor's side has been replaced. Medical ethics focused
on patient's autonomy and developed a setting of partnership of equals
between doctor and patient.
In the armed conflict with clear rules, ranks, and orders, the doctor-patient
partnership is generally not working or merely impossible. The paternalistic
setting is the rule. As hierarchy matters in military, staff officers,
and even more generals are as a matter of fact privileged. For the most
part it is the doctor or the doctors' team that
- chooses between comparable treatment options, of course also on the
issue of resources often limited in the armed conflict compared with
- decides on life-threatening treatment, and
- makes decisions about life-sustaining technology.
Another main difference between the weIl-known principles of triage in
civilian catastrophes and in the armed conflict is that the medical officer
often faces the dilemma that he/she by understandable emotion and sympathy
likes to give priority in treatment to his/her own party's patients and
to sidetrack the others. From an ethical point of view however the military
medical officer should give priority to medical aspects only, meaning
that he/she should not (even not when ordered) give priority to his own
party or make distinctions between military ranks.
The previous discussion of "pro-life" versus "pro-choice"
parties is very relevant in the armed conflict and triage, too. Under
all circumstance, there should be no mercy killing of severely wounded
or dying soldiers but above all very sufficient action against pain, which
might of course result in shortening of life as a side effect.
Killing people in the armed conflict, seeing people killed, or facing
the possibility to loose one's own life every second is a profound source
of stress. Stress, dysfunctional responses, and ethical conflicts flow
into each other. The adverse and the own party as weIl as family and friends
at home are involved and play a role. The dysfunctional responses vary
from minimal - like brief emotional reactions and cognitive distortions
to severe psychiatric decompensation like autoaggression, severe depression,
and even suicide.
Good strategies of coping with stress disorders should be present in every
military medical officers mind and should not be an exclusive obligation
for psychiatrists who in many armies are not present to the needed extent
in the field. A distinction between mild and moderate disorders, especially
diagnosing the beginning psychiatric disease, should be trained to reach
a high amount of right situational diagnosis. The cooperation between
medical officers in the field, psychiatrist, and psychologist, also with
priests from different religions should be as good as possible. A hierarchy
of necessary interventions according to personal and technical resources
should be present.
Ethics, law, and order are closely intertwined in the practice of the
armed conflict. Legalism, to an even greater extent strategic and tactical
military needs, is commonly used by commanders to both obscure and resolve
ethical dilemmas. Therefore, a special training for commanders in law
of the armed conflict, which is already mainly the role, in ethics and
in critical incident stress debriefing is critical. Despite the best training,
however, the daily necessities and ad hoc solutions in the armed conflict
may place an enormous burden on the individual soldier. The dilemma and
the inner conflict remain and quite often the problems are displaced,
never outspoken, never solved for a lifetime. The answer should be a foIlow-up
after the conflict to identify and to help in mislabelled cases or in
detecting the hidden ones.
Resolutions of moral conflicts are at best based on global ethical consensus
on guidelines rather than on doctrinaire prohibitions backed by criminal
or other sanctions. Tolerant laws respecting the dignity of life and distinct
medical ethical codes can be responsive to individual moral choices. At
the end of life, all means of palliative care should be used to secure
human dignity and to prevent suicide or the demand for medically assisted
death. In abortion, education and financial support, in particular, in
prevention of unplanned pregnancy should be considerably increased as
weIl as financial and social support for childbirth and adoption.
Providing health for all in the 21st century is WHO's main aim. As a body
of 191-member states throughout the world, WHO recognizes that it has
a unique mandate and responsibility to guide all partners involved in
global governance of heath toward the attainment of health for all. Promoting
international collective action that benefits all countries, and by responding
to global threats to health, however, needs the strongest possible political
support of the United Nations, including actions against poverty and repression.
Equity in all levels of health and health care has to be considered and
understood as a basic human right and the prior condition for enduring
freedom and lasting peace.
As far as military medical ethics is concerned, a military ethics committee
could be an international advisory council that gathers together competent
medical officers from different medical fields, religions, nations, and
military alliances. Of course it should include people from other faculties
like jurists, scientists, theologians, philosophers, and politicians.
This ethics committee would be endowed neither with administrative authority
nor juridical powers but would have a strictly advisory role. The committee
by its existence and efforts could trigger the ethical discourse in medical
corps worldwide and help to bridge the gaps in favour of partnership for
peace. Reflecting on Franz Kafka's observation that "to prescribe
pills is easy, but to reach an understanding in people is very hard,
why not give military medical officers an active role not only in maintaining
and restoring the physical level of health but also the social, mental,
and spiritual levels. The first important step would be to assume the
obligations of dialogue by respecting each other and taking each other's
views seriously without any prejudice in nationality, culture, and religion
It is obvious that ethical codes once hopefully achieved on global consensus
per se are not satisfactory. History often has shown undesirable trends
and malfeasance despite ethical regulations. To achieve the high aim of
peace and freedom, the ethical sensitivity and moral integrity of the
individual, in our context of doctors, group of doctors, and ideally of
the entire medical profession, are more important than written ethical
codes. There is a special role for medical doctors to participate as individuals
as weIl as a collective in these efforts by continuously working for health
in every aspect, including spiritual health, and to try to decrease egoism
and ignorance in one's own mind in the best possible way and above all
to extinguish hatred and to build up tolerance, humaneness, and respect
1. Brundtland GH: Health The key to human development.
Frankfurt. Campus, 2000.
2. Beachump TL, Childress JF: Principles of biomedical ethics,
4th Ed. New York. Oxford
University Press, 1994.
3. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences:
International Guidelines for
biomedical research involving human subjects. Geneva. Council for International
Organizations of Medical Sciences, 1993.
4. Schapowal A (editor): Medizin und Ethik. Ethik in der Medizin
1998; 10, Suppl. 1.
5. Bankowski Z, Bryant JH (editors): Poverty, vulnerability, and
the value of human life. Geneva.
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences, 1995.
6. Bankowski Z, Bryant JH, Gallagher J (editors): Ethics, equity
and health for all. Geneva.
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences, 1997.
7. Bettcher D, Yach D: The globalization of public health ethics?
Int Stud 1998; 27: 469 96.
8. Velasquez G, Boulet P: Globalization and Access to Drugs: Implications
of the WTO/TRIPs
Agreement. Geneva. World Health Organization, 1997.
9. Küng H: A Global ethics The Declaration of the
Parliament of the World´ Religions. New
York. Continuum, 1995.
10. Khayat MH: Health an Islamic Perspective. The Right
Path to Health Health education
through Religion. No. 4. Alexandria. World Health Organization, 1997.
11. Steinberg A: Jewish medical ethics. In: Bioethics Yearbook.
Vol. 1. Theological
Developments in Bioethics1988 1990, pp 271 9. Edited by
Brody BA et al. Dordrecht.
Kluwer Academic, 1991.
12. Steinberg A: A Jewish perspective on the four principles.
In: Principles of Health Care
Ethics, pp 65 73. Edited by Gillon R. New York. Wiley, 1994.
13. Quinn KP: Assisted suicide and equal protection: in defense
of the distinction between
killing and letting die. Issues Law Med 1997; 13: 145 71.
14. Keown J: The law and practice of euthanasia in the Netherlands.
Law Q Rev 1992; 108:
15. Bopp J Jr, Coleson RE: Roe v. Wade and the euthanasia debate.
Issues Law Med 1997;
12: 343- 54.
16. Cohen-Almagor R: Medical ethics at the dawn of the 21st century.
Ann NY Acad Sci 2000;
913: 88 104.
LTC Andreas Schapowal MD, Swiss Academy of Medicine and Ethics, Hochwangstrasse
3, CH- 7302 Landquart; E-mail: email@example.com.
COL Hans-Ulrich Baer, Associate Professor of Surgery, Digestive Surgery
Institute, Witellikerstrasse 40, CH-8029 Zürich, Switzerland; E-mail:
Correspondence: LTC Schapowal.
This manuscript was received for review April 2002. The revised manuscript
was accepted for publication in April 2002.
Reprint & Copyright @ by Association of Military Surgeons of U.S.,