Why abandon medical ethics in the face of the War on Terror?

Comments on the Iraqi survey by a leading US bioethicist, Edmund Pellegrino, shed light on how difficult it will be for them.

"Character formation is, in the end, the surest way to inculcate the virtues," he wrote. "This cannot occur unless the culture of the profession is itself ethically rigorous. Even the most virtuous physicians need a supportive culture to remain virtuous. Heroes can stand alone, but they are few and often castigated."

If Australian doctors are ethical in civilian life, then, it's unlikely that they will be suborned by the war on terror.

But do they work in an ethical culture, a rigorously ethical culture?

My crystal ball doesn't show Australian doctors amputating ears. But some perform cosmetic surgery for trivial reasons, some can be bribed by drug companies, some do research without informed consent, and some euthanase their patients. There's no room for complacency.

Any temptation that undermines the fundamental duty of doctors to evaluate, protect and improve the health of their patients must be taken seriously by the profession and the public. Otherwise the lives of prisoners in the Great War on Terror could well be at risk.