Switch to: References

Citations of:

The limits of impartial medical treatment during armed conflict

In Michael L. Gross & Don Carrick (eds.), Military Medical Ethics for the 21st Century. Ashgate (2012)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Saving Life, Limb, and Eyesight: Assessing the Medical Rules of Eligibility During Armed Conflict”.Michael L. Gross - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics 17 (10):1-3.
    Medical rules of eligibility permit severely injured Iraqi and Afghan nationals to receive care in Coalition medical facilities only if bed space is available and their injuries result directly from Coalition fire. The first rule favors Coalition soldiers over host-nation nationals and contradicts the principle of impartial, needs-based medical care. To justify preferential care for compatriots, wartime medicine invokes associative obligations of care that favor friends, family, and comrades-in-arms. Associative obligations have little place in peacetime medical care but significantly affect (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Military Medical Ethics.Michael L. Gross - 2013 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 22 (1):92-109.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Military Medical Ethics.Michael L. Gross - 2013 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 22 (1):92-109.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations