Page 334 - 20818_park-B_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 11 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 11 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 11 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 11 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Magenta
#
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 11 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Yellow 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 11 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Magenta 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 11 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Cyan 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 11 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Black
the patient to someone else. Therefore, only in that case can we say
that the oath was forced upon the physician.
1 SuMMaRy and Conclusions
1. If a physician swears before he examines a patient that he will
not reveal the patient’s illness, he is not allowed to reveal it, un-
less there is danger to the public involved, such as if the patient’s
vision is 6/30 and perhaps even 6/21.
2. If the physician receives no salary, three Torah scholars can
probably release him from his oath. Even so, it is best if the phy-
sician not actually reveal the illness to the authorities but rather
hint at the need for a repeat examination.
3. If a cancer patient who does not know his own condition asks
the treating physician to swear that he does not have cancer, the
physician is probably allowed to swear. In his heart his intention
should be that the patient does not have the creature named sar-
tan (cancer/crab). It is proper for him to announce beforehand
(to someone else) that this is his true intention.
4. If a physician swears to an elderly patient that he will not make
more than a certain amount of attempts to insert a needle in his
vein, the oath is probably valid.
328 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
#
have come apart and she is physically shattered, even if she does not
feel so at the moment.” In other words, even if she does not sense it
now, she will suffer the effects as time goes by. These are novel words
and require further study.
And this is not a contradiction to the Binyan Tziyon’s assertion
that if the danger is not immediate we go according to the majority.
The fasting of children or patients with tuberculosis is not considered
a possible future danger; rather, the weakness brought on by the fast
affects them immediately, but becomes visible only some time later.
On the other hand, the examples cited in the Binyan Tziyon are those
where there is no present danger but only the possibility of danger in
the future. In these situations, we go according to the majority, and
“Hashem watches over fools.”
1 SuMMaRy and Conclusions
It seems that if the epileptic seizures occur infrequently, such as once
a year, the physician can refrain from reporting the illness to the au-
thorities and thus depriving the patient of his livelihood. (However,
if the driver himself were to seek our advice, we would advise him not
to drive.)
Driver has epilepsy 2 333