General Setup:
There is only one doctor working at the emergency room and he can only attend to one patient at a time.
Scenario A:
John and Emily walk into the emergency room. John has suffered a serious injury in which he would lose his ability to walk altogether if he does not get treatment. Emily has a less serious injury in which she would only lose a foot if she doesn't get treatment. Who gets treatment first?
Scenario B:
John and Emily walk into the emergency room. John again has the more serious injury, and Emily has the less serious injury. However, John and Emily are married, and John insists that the doctor save his wife's foot before attending his legs, and thus John is refusing immediate treatment. Who gets treatment first?
Scenario C:
John, Emily and Amber walk into the emergency room. John again has the more serious injury, and Emily has the less serious injury. Amber has an intermediate injury, where she would lose one leg if she doesn't get treatment. John is again transferring his treatment onto his wife Emily.
Who gets treatment first?
>>3120960
A: John
B: Emily
C: Sir, if you don't want the surgery, i will attend Amber. If still refusing, then Amber.
Harvest all their organs for my reanimated army.
>>3121018
This
John can't "transfer" treatment onto whoever he wants.
He has the right to decline treatment of course, in which case the next most seriously injured person should be treated
>>3120960
John in all cases. Who cares what this bleeding fuck is saying? He could be on drugs for all I know.
philosophy is useless
>>3121104
sorry we dont live in commietown, people have rights
>>3120960
medfag here
John
Emily (you can refuse treatment)
You can't transfer treatment. You can decline treatment. So you go to whoever is worse between Emily or Amber, unless one of them declines as well
>>3120960
>John and Emily walk into emergency room
>both have injuries pertaining to their ability to walk