Poll: Kill one to save ten?

[irishstormtrooper]

Personally, I would, but the Hippocratic Oath that doctors take does not allow this. Unless the doctor wants to lose his/her license, he/she has to treat all patients.

 

[Wolcik]

I'd kill 100 to save none. Maybe not my close family because I'm a hypocrite XD

 

[Zorg Machine]

if I didn't I would blame myself and if I did I would be blamed by others... I would do it.

 

[Asciotes]

this is one of those questions there's no right answer to, So I thus refuse to answer.

 

[Gerazzi]

Yes, the guilt of killing one is less than the guilt of killing ten.
It's as simple as that.

 

[Zallest]

I cannot generate a opinion on this. It reminds me of the episode of Torchwood where Captain Jack had to kill his Grandson to save 10% of the children on earth infront of his daughter. Heart breaking and touching moment..

I don't believe i could do it but from the sounds of it 215 of you would so i don't really have to worry!

 

[sam13lfc]

I actually voted "Yes" but now I've remembered that this would be murder...so I'd save the organ donor, then kill myself and get someone to do the ten transplants with my organs.

Then my plan to live through 10 different people at once would be complete >

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Yes, of course I would. What's the point of saving one person at the price of 10?

 

[LeonLethality]

"the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"

 

[Jedoro]

I'd ask him if he would be willing to, but I wouldn't make that choice for him. He's still alive, and I can save him, so it's his call.

 

[Danman1]

Damnit I meant to hit know but my mouse did that weird jerky thing. Im against overpopulation.

 

[Andalusa]

I would probably panic and let someone else choose.

 

[Abedeus]

In this situation? No. First - do not harm.

If, however, someone gave me a gun, and ordered to kill one person (I do not know) or he will shoot 10 other people, I would. Because I'm not a doctor then xd

 

[nicholaxxx]

It violates the Hippocratic oath so no. I'm disgusted with anyone who said yes, I think you all should be cut up for organ transplants as ironic punishment.

why? if you were killing nine people to save ten, then I could see, but it's only one, he's in critical condition anyway, so there's a possibility that he won't survive even if you DO something.
I'm just ending his suffering and the suffering of the other TEN poeple, the end is greater than the means, think about it, its ONE PERSON to save TEN PEOPLE, and if you say 'it wouldn't be my fault if the ten people died' technically, yes it would be, you had the option to end a suffering man's life to get the organs that you knew were IMPOSSIBLE TO GET ANYWHERE ELSE and you passed it up. saving his life, but ending ten others in the process, IMO that's worse

you might say 'a life for ten isn't worth it' I have this to say:

you're saving 1 and ending ten, so ten lives for one, does that sound worth it? didn't think so.

 

[DavidD]

I'd kill 10 to save 1 if that 1 was worth it.

 

[geldonyetich]

I almost answered "yes" immediately on the grounds that letting one patient die to save ten is a no brainer. Then I read a little deeper, and discovered that this is a little more complicated: you're considering killing him and harvesting his organs. No, I don't think so. A doctor who butchers the people brought in for his care in order to patch up others is little more than a glorified Frankenstein.

 

[ffxfriek]

Save the man... who are you to decide he should die?

seconded