Wie beslist om ernstig zieken in een woonzorgcentrum te laten

Discussion about the ethics of selection of sick persons not to receive full therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia. A first comment went online March 20th; an update about old-age homes was added April 21rst. Newspapers announced that societies of geriatrics and intensive care specialists, and university clinics, have written their own criteria for the selection of corona patients to be or not to be treated in intensive care, in case beds will be short. Philosophers also gave their opinion. Criteria differed: either old age has a negative advice, or poor statistical probability for survival; women are not mentioned (as at a shipwreck). These views imply that the right to medical treatment is no longer guaranteed, although there was and is no shortage of intensive beds. I point to the paradox of (possible) shortage of beds/apparatus vs the 1110 billion offered by the ECB in support of the economy, and the billion of dividends distributed by corporations last year. In the update I point to the larger number of deaths in old-age homes than in hospitals, indicating that these patients were not transferred for full therapy, for which the homes are not equipped. I question that patients or their families gave informed consent for refusal of therapy; or whether such choice was not offered at all. Experts say that the selection guidelines might be used by defense in court in case MD’s are sued.