Medical Neutrality

Under international law military doctors are expected to be neutral in the sense of treating the wounded in accordance with their medical needs alone irrespective of which side they are on, and military staff enjoy immunity from attack in consequence. But it has been objected that their military role should sometimes lead them to act otherwise. The paper maintains that this misunderstands the doctor’s role in the armed forces, but the objection does raise the question of why the forces employ doctors with their strict ethical code rather than medical technicians who would just obey orders rather than following purely medical priorities. The paper claims that this is because adherence to the principles of discrimination and proportionality would result in such staff usually being ordered to act in accordance with the same priorities as doctors proper. The immunity from attack of medical staff can be derived from the same principles. Possible exceptions and the applicability of the present system of neutrality to contemporary conflicts are discussed.