Moskop J C
Department of Medical Humanities, East Carolina University School of Medicine, Greenville, NC 27858, USA.
Mil Med. 1998 Feb;163(2):76-9.
This paper offers a brief examination of the moral status of military medicine. Military physicians assume one set of obligations as physicians, including obligations of beneficence, nonmaleficence, and respect for autonomy. They assume another set of obligations as members of an armed service, such as maintaining combat readiness and maximizing the fighting strength of the force. These different obligations may come into conflict, but so may the obligations of civilian physicians in a variety of practice settings. In military service, however, both patients and physicians give up a greater measure of autonomy over their choices and actions than they do in most other settings. Because of both their increased risks and their decreased ability to make choices, military personnel can be viewed as a vulnerable population. Military physicians' ability to act on their behalf, however, is limited by the physicians' obligations to pursue military goals and to obey the lawful orders of superior officers. A physician's decision to enter military service is thus a morally weighty one that bears reflection on the practices of the military service to which one is pledging obedience.
本文简要探讨了军事医学的道德地位。军事医生作为医生承担着一系列义务，包括行善、不伤害和尊重自主权的义务。他们作为武装部队的成员还承担着另一系列义务，比如保持战斗准备状态以及使部队战斗力最大化。这些不同的义务可能会产生冲突，不过在各种医疗实践环境中， civilian医生的义务也可能出现冲突。然而，在服兵役期间，与大多数其他环境相比，患者和医生在其选择和行动上放弃了更大程度的自主权。由于军事人员面临的风险增加且做出选择的能力下降，他们可被视为弱势群体。然而，军事医生代表他们采取行动的能力受到医生追求军事目标以及服从上级军官合法命令的义务的限制。因此，一名医生决定投身军旅是一个具有重大道德意义的决定，这值得人们思考自己宣誓服从的军事服务的做法。 （注：原文中“civilian physicians”直译为“平民医生”，结合语境这里可能是想说“普通医生”，但按照要求未做修改。）
