Physicians' strikes--a rejoinder.

S. M. Glick

doi:10.1136/jme.11.4.196

Physicians' strikes--a rejoinder.

S. M. Glick

Medical School for International Health

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

11 Scopus citations

Abstract

The author, a physician, rejects a previous defence of a doctors' strike. There is little justification for strikes in general, still less for doctors' strikes, he claims. Should not doctors rather 'stand above the common herd' and set an example, he asks. Furthermore the whole idea of strikes in which a third and innocent party is deliberately punished in order to apply pressure on someone else is a 'a bizarre ethic indeed' and not to his knowledge justified under any ethical theory.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	196-197
Number of pages	2
Journal	Journal of Medical Ethics
Volume	11
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.11.4.196
State	Published - 1 Jan 1985

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Health(social science)
Issues, ethics and legal aspects
Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
Health Policy

Access to Document

10.1136/jme.11.4.196

Cite this

@article{42b89734320a40f6ba20c50032af210d,

title = "Physicians' strikes--a rejoinder.",

abstract = "The author, a physician, rejects a previous defence of a doctors' strike. There is little justification for strikes in general, still less for doctors' strikes, he claims. Should not doctors rather 'stand above the common herd' and set an example, he asks. Furthermore the whole idea of strikes in which a third and innocent party is deliberately punished in order to apply pressure on someone else is a 'a bizarre ethic indeed' and not to his knowledge justified under any ethical theory.",

author = "Glick, {S. M.}",

year = "1985",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1136/jme.11.4.196",

language = "English",

volume = "11",

pages = "196--197",

journal = "Journal of Medical Ethics",

issn = "0306-6800",

publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Physicians' strikes--a rejoinder.

AU - Glick, S. M.

PY - 1985/1/1

Y1 - 1985/1/1

N2 - The author, a physician, rejects a previous defence of a doctors' strike. There is little justification for strikes in general, still less for doctors' strikes, he claims. Should not doctors rather 'stand above the common herd' and set an example, he asks. Furthermore the whole idea of strikes in which a third and innocent party is deliberately punished in order to apply pressure on someone else is a 'a bizarre ethic indeed' and not to his knowledge justified under any ethical theory.

AB - The author, a physician, rejects a previous defence of a doctors' strike. There is little justification for strikes in general, still less for doctors' strikes, he claims. Should not doctors rather 'stand above the common herd' and set an example, he asks. Furthermore the whole idea of strikes in which a third and innocent party is deliberately punished in order to apply pressure on someone else is a 'a bizarre ethic indeed' and not to his knowledge justified under any ethical theory.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0022289204&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/jme.11.4.196

DO - 10.1136/jme.11.4.196

M3 - Article

C2 - 4078858

AN - SCOPUS:0022289204

SN - 0306-6800

VL - 11

SP - 196

EP - 197

JO - Journal of Medical Ethics

JF - Journal of Medical Ethics

IS - 4

ER -

Physicians' strikes--a rejoinder.

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this