Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
False
News & media
Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
Debate current medical affairs
The US has confirmed that a Pakistani doctor Shikal Afridi was used as an undercover agent to help locate Osama Bin Laden. He claimed to be running a Hep B vaccination campaign in order to gain entry
0
Cat:OffDutyForum:NewsMedia
Cat:OffDutyForum:NewsMediaDiscussion:cca2312b-86d9-47e8-88fd-a2da1e3936b3
Forums » Off duty » News & media » Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
Forums
»
Off duty
»
News & media
»
Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
|
Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
posted at 31/1/2012 1:54 PM GMT
on bmj.com
|
|
*Moderator*
Posts: 1436
First: 7/4/2011 Last: 17/5/2013 |
The US has confirmed that a Pakistani doctor Shikal Afridi was used as an undercover agent to help locate Osama Bin Laden. He claimed to be running a Hep B vaccination campaign in order to gain entry to Bin Laden’s compound in Abbotabad. Once inside, it was hoped he would be able to obtain DNA samples from those living in the compound and that these could be positively matched with the CIA’s Bin Laden family DNA samples. Bin Laden is dead but Dr Afridi is now being held in a Pakistan prison. Medicines sans Frontiers told the BMJ “Deceptive use of medical care endangers those who provide legitimate and essential health services. Furthermore, carrying out an act of no therapeutic or preventative benefit purely for military or intelligence purposes violates medical ethics, which require acting solely on the needs of patients and doing no harm.”
Was this an ethical ruse used by the CIA? Will it make people more suspicious of doctors who work on vaccination programmes (legitimate or not)? Or was it an acceptable yet one off strategy to track down Bin Laden?
|
|
Re: Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
posted at 31/1/2012 5:23 PM GMT
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 134
First: 25/5/2011 Last: 17/5/2013 |
It was wrong. In our professional capacity we should be above such matters. I fail to see how playing secret agent in order to get a man killed lives up to the historical aspirations of this once noble profession. Once we sanction murder in any form as a profession, we will loose any respect from our patients and for ourselves. |
|
|
Re: Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
posted at 31/1/2012 6:15 PM GMT
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 339
First: 17/12/2011 Last: 15/5/2013 |
Sorry but I think its wrong. I accept that Bin Laden was terriblly wrong in the actions that he advocated but it is not for a Doctor to help to kill under the disguise of doing a hepatitis vacination campaign. I agree with Medicines sans Frontiers spoksman that it may endanger other Doctors particularly those working in ' Third World Countries'. |
|
|
Re: Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
posted at 31/1/2012 11:03 PM GMT
on bmj.com
|
|
Posts: 134
First: 25/5/2011 Last: 17/5/2013 |
Let us just consider this by examining another, but similar scenario. Imagine two helicopters full of Pakistani special forces fly into an American city at night and despite no Court Ruling, conviction or warrant issued by the local authorities, run into a man's house, make no attempt to arrest him and shoot him dead before taking his body and dropping it far out to sea. It then turns out that a local American doctor has been paid money to have carried out fictitious tests on the man's family, using his status as a respected professional, in order to establish DNA identification for the Pakistani special forces to be sure that they are shooting the right man. As doctors we are then asked if we think that our colleague's actions were acceptable. So far 50% of us, at the time of posting, are happy that nothing unprofessional has happened in this case. Could somebody who believes this please post the rationale for their decision, because although I can some see problems with it, I do not discount the fact that I may have missed something important that my esteemed colleagues might have noticed. |
|
|
Re: Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
posted at 1/2/2012 11:52 PM GMT
on bmj.com
|
|
Posts: 134
First: 25/5/2011 Last: 17/5/2013 |
The percentage who now think it was justified has risen above 50% at the time of this posting, yet nobody has been able to find the time to explain to me why they believe this. I find this remarkable. Can nobody summon the words to explain their decision to me? Should the BMA and other professional organisions now draw up a list of international celebrities who need "whacking" without trial? Should doctors now take the lead in training where best to aim a shot in order to "waste" somebody? Why are you voting that a doctor, as some sort of a moral duty, should be involved as an accessory in military assassinations? I don't know the evidence against this man, maybe you could direct me to the evidence? This is one of the poorest debates that I have been involved in so far on these pages; will nobody present the case for the prosecution? |
|
|
Re: Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
posted at 2/2/2012 11:44 AM GMT
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 478
First: 15/11/2008 Last: 21/8/2012 |
Bravo Shikal Afridi. Whilst i respect that everyone has their own opinion and am at a loss as to why this decision is being questioned. Perhaps many of you have forgotten the number of innocent lives lost due to Bin Laden's leadership and doctrine? I for one fully applaud anyone that gives information on a proven killer and if they end up getting shot then so be it. Afridi did not pull the trigger, he gave information on his location. Keep that in mind! |
|
|
Re: Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
posted at 2/2/2012 12:35 PM GMT
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 575
First: 8/6/2011 Last: 14/5/2013 |
The definition of what is right and what is wrong is very relative. In war every part says that they are and doing right. The fact is that the war begins where the rational stops . The best would be medicine to not be involved on it. Unfortunately the history shows to us that medicine is involved ( like in the second world war ) . That should be forbidden and punished by the international comunity. But the law is like a spider web that catches small insects but the bigers break it and escape. I think that if he had been aressted alive , the international comunity could gather a lot of important informations directly from him about the terorist organisations, their structure and their secret actions. So for me all these stinks. Now especialy about Bin Laden i think it was right the use medical care to track him becouse he was a mass killer in action. |
|
|
Re: Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
posted at 3/2/2012 2:00 PM GMT
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 3
First: 3/2/2012 Last: 27/11/2012 |
Shahid Afridi was not a doctor at the first instance.he was smuggler and wnated to make money by any means.Infact his appointment inKhyber Agency as Agency doctor was questioned three times by the doctors community.He would sell his mother for twenty thousand dollors. The very idea that any methode is ligitimate to capture a terrorist is only correct if it is applied with even handed and accross the road.How about nabbing Tony Blaier and George the Bush.Dont you think they are the biggeset terrorists.Their hands are stained iwth blood of more inncent people ??? How about nabbing them and how to nabb them? |
Forums » Off duty » News & media » Was it wrong to use medical care as a reason to track down Bin Laden?
