Page 196 - 20818_park-c_efi

Thus it seems that the words of the Shulchan Shlomo apply only to to travel to a more distant hospital where the atmosphere is friendly
a sick child who does not say anything. However, if an adult says “I
want to be treated by physician so-and-so,” and he places no trust in
the physician of the healthcare clinic, it would be permissible to give
him charity money.
1 SuMMaRy and Conclusions
1. It is permissible to desecrate Shabbos to be healed by a more
expert physician.
2. If a child has a physician willing to treat him, but the family
wants him to be treated by a renowned physician, then if the
second physician has significantly greater experience than the
first – i.e. if the physician of the healthcare clinic has performed
hundreds of such surgeries, while the expert has performed
thousands of surgeries – and the surgery is a complicated one,
then the money contributed for this purpose is considered tze-
dakah.
3. If the patient himself refuses to use the surgeon provided by the
Kupat Cholim since he was previously treated by him unsuc-
cessfully, then it seems that money collected for this purpose is
considered tzedakah as well.
182 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
7
and each person respects the opinion of the other.
The Tumim (#7:12) wonders: How is it possible that there are
Torah scholars who hate each other? Are they wicked people who
violate Torah prohibitions, such as “You shall not hate your brother
in your heart” (Vayikra 19:17)? If the explanation is that each of them
claims that his friend has transgressed a grave sin and it is therefore
permissible to hate him, then how would he sit with him in beis din?
This requires further study, for one can answer this question, but only
with difficulty.
Were it not for the holy words of the Tumim, we could explain
that this does not refer to two Torah scholars who literally hate each
other, but rather to two Torah scholars whose conduct differs greatly
from each other, as explained by the Birkei Yosef above. Since they are
so different, they cannot find anything in common and they behave as
if they hate each other. Whatever one understands, the other under-
stands the opposite. What one draws near, the other distances, and
what one justifies the other says is evil. There is no personal hatred
between them, however, so they do not violate any Torah prohibition.
Nonetheless they are forbidden to sit together in one beis din because
dayanim are obligated to ask advice from each other. If they do not
deliberate with each other, they will not reach common ground and
the verdict will be wrong.
We see from here that a cordial and friendly hospital merits Divine
Assistance. In a hospital fraught with tension and hostility among
the staff, the Divine Presence will not dwell. Notwithstanding the
expertise of the physicians, they will not succeed so long as they don’t
confer with each other. This was the sin of Nadav and Avihu; they
did not confer with each other, as explained in the Midrash Rabbah
(Vayikra, 20:8). The sages interpreted this from the words “And Na-
dav and Avihu, the sons of Aharon, took, each of them, his censor”
(Vayikra 10:1). Therefore, one should not admit himself to such a
hospital on a weekday, and he is probably also permitted to desecrate
Relationships Among Physicians 2 207