Solnica et al argue that “Jewish law and modern secular approaches based on professional responsibilities obligate physicians to care for all patients even those with communicable diseases”. The authors base their viewpoint on the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg and apply it to suggest that physicians are obligated to endanger themselves during epidemics, such as COVID-19. It is argued that Solnica et al’s analysis of Rabbi Waldenberg’s text and their conclusion that healthcare workers are obligated to endanger themselves while treating patient who suffer from contagious illness during epidemics according to Jewish law suffer from various shortcomings. Indeed, Jewish law looks favourably on healthcare workers who take a reasonable risk in treating their patients in the context of epidemics. However, it is considered a voluntary supererogatory act—not obligatory. Solnica et al may express a legitimate ethical viewpoint. However, it does not seem to represent the mainstream approach of what Jewish law would demand as obligatory from its practitioners.
- applied and professional ethics
- clinical ethics
- health care for specific diseases/groups
- religious ethics
This article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usage
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Correction notice This paper has been updated since first published to amend correspondence details.
Contributors I am the sole author of the paper.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The healthcare worker at risk during the COVID-19 pandemic: a Jewish ethical perspective
- Allocation of scarce resources during the COVID-19 pandemic: a Jewish ethical perspective
- The search for organs: halachic perspectives on altruistic giving and the selling of organs
- Ethics of sharing medical knowledge with the community: is the physician responsible for medical outreach during a pandemic?
- Is the clock ticking for terminally ill patients in Israel? Preliminary comment on a proposal for a bill of rights for the terminally ill
- What are the attitudes of strictly-orthodox Jews to clinical trials: are they influenced by Jewish teachings?
- Balancing the duty to treat with the duty to family in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic
- Artificial nutrition and hydration in the patient with advanced dementia: is withholding treatment compatible with traditional Judaism?
- Withholding artificial feeding from the severely demented: merciful or immoral? Contrasts between secular and Jewish perspectives
- The transplantation of solid organs from HIV-positive donors to HIV-negative recipients: ethical implications