Abstract

The New Orleans catastrophe and the subsequent allegation of homicides at Memorial Medical Center have complicated our thinking about end-of-life care. Can the conditions in a collapsed health care system ever excuse euthanasia? Following a review of current legal and ethical standards for the causation of death in the clinical setting, and an assessment of the most common argument for euthanasia — the argument from intractable suffering — a different argument is set out for the excusability of euthanasia, one based on forced abandonment. While more familiar in battlefield medicine, this line of reasoning may have applied in post-Katrina New Orleans. When health care professionals are compelled to leave a hazardous clinical setting, and where it is impossible to evacuate patients who are not expected to survive, clinicians must choose between abandoning these patients to die unattended and unmedicated, or euthanizing them before leaving themselves. Because each of these options stands as an egregious violation of an important health care norm, and because there is no third option, neither violation can be rightly condemned.