Health Justice for Unjust Combatants

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Blake Hereth
{"title":"Health Justice for Unjust Combatants","authors":"Blake Hereth","doi":"10.1080/15027570.2021.1949782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Are field medics morally permitted to treat unjust combatants? I distinguish between two kinds of enemy combatants: reactivated ones who will rejoin the fight, and deactivated ones who will not rejoin the fight. Helen Frowe has argued that field medics are not permitted to treat reactivated combatants but is silent about deactivated ones. First, I argue that Frowe’s account plausibly extends to a moral prohibition on treating deactivated combatants in addition to reactivated ones. Second, I argue that the best argument for treating deactivated enemy soldiers extends also to reactivated ones but holds only for groups, which undermines Frowe’s general position. I thus defend the mainstream view, enshrined in the Geneva Convention, that the treatment of deactivated unjust combatants (and maybe, in some cases, reactivated unjust combatants) by partisan or nonpartisan field medics is often all-things-considered morally obligatory.","PeriodicalId":39180,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Military Ethics","volume":"20 1","pages":"67 - 81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15027570.2021.1949782","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Military Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15027570.2021.1949782","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT Are field medics morally permitted to treat unjust combatants? I distinguish between two kinds of enemy combatants: reactivated ones who will rejoin the fight, and deactivated ones who will not rejoin the fight. Helen Frowe has argued that field medics are not permitted to treat reactivated combatants but is silent about deactivated ones. First, I argue that Frowe’s account plausibly extends to a moral prohibition on treating deactivated combatants in addition to reactivated ones. Second, I argue that the best argument for treating deactivated enemy soldiers extends also to reactivated ones but holds only for groups, which undermines Frowe’s general position. I thus defend the mainstream view, enshrined in the Geneva Convention, that the treatment of deactivated unjust combatants (and maybe, in some cases, reactivated unjust combatants) by partisan or nonpartisan field medics is often all-things-considered morally obligatory.
为不公正战斗人员提供保健正义
摘要:战地医生在道德上是否被允许治疗不公正的战斗人员?我区分了两种类型的敌方战斗人员:重新激活的将重新加入战斗的战斗人员和停用的将不会重新加入战斗。海伦·弗罗韦(Helen Frowe)辩称,野战医务人员不允许治疗重新激活的战斗人员,但对停用的战斗人员保持沉默。首先,我认为弗罗维的描述似乎延伸到了道德上的禁止,即除了重新激活的战斗人员之外,还禁止治疗停用的战斗人员。其次,我认为,治疗停用的敌方士兵的最佳论据也适用于重新启用的敌方士兵,但仅适用于团体,这破坏了弗罗维的总体立场。因此,我捍卫《日内瓦公约》所载的主流观点,即党派或无党派的战地医生对待被停用的非正义战斗人员(在某些情况下,可能还有被重新启用的非正义作战人员),通常都被认为是道德义务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Military Ethics
Journal of Military Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信