August 14 , 2002 9:30 a.m.
This One’s a General
Richard Carmona, hero.
By Dave
Kopel & Timothy Wheeler 
estosterone is in again. Witness the ascent of Dr. Richard Carmona,
the true-to-life hero nominated by President Bush for the post of
surgeon general and recently confirmed, unanimously, by the Senate.
Our new surgeon general displays the manly virtue of courage that our
nation has again learned to admire since we went to war. The
confirmation process reflects our rediscovered consensus that real men
aren't afraid to use force — even deadly force — when necessary to
protect a woman from a violent predator.
Carmona's life
story is one of overcoming adversity and excelling in service to
others. A high-school dropout from Harlem, he joined the Army and won
two Purple Hearts, serving as a medic and a Green Beret. After
distinguishing himself as a soldier he resumed his education, becoming
a trauma surgeon and earning a postgraduate degree in health policy
and administration. Carmona also directed the first trauma care
program in southern Arizona.
Along the way,
the surgeon-soldier-administrator became an expert on bioterrorism and
an advocate for bioterrorism preparedness several years before
September 11. So far, shining credentials for a surgeon general.
But Carmona's
other high-profile accomplishments stirred a controversy that
highlights Americans' ambiguity about the use of force. In 1999
Carmona, a sheriff's deputy and SWAT-team member, encountered a man
assaulting a woman. As the Los Angles Times later explained,
Carmona had "stumbled onto a killer who was holding a woman hostage.
The man, who police later determined had stabbed his father to death
and was on his way to kill an old girlfriend, grazed Carmona's head
with a bullet before the doctor, also a badge-carrying sheriff's
deputy, fired a single shot to kill him."
Carmona had done his job as a sworn peace officer and saved the life
of an innocent woman, as well as his own.
But University
of Arizona colleague Dr. Charles Putnam denounced Carmona for
allegedly violating the physician's duty to do no harm. But in fact,
the "do no harm" phrase is a simplification of language from
the
Hippocratic Oath:
I will follow
that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment,
I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever
is deleterious and mischievous. I will give no deadly medicine to
any one if asked.
This language
is, by its terms, confined to the physician's role in treating his
patients — not in his role as a father defending a home from a violent
invader, or a peace officer defending his community from a murderer.
When the Hippocratic Oath is meant to apply to a physician's
non-professional life, the oath specifically says so, for a physician
is bound to keep secret he learns "in connection with my professional
practice or not in connection with it."
In modern times, most medical ethicists have not delved into issues
involving homicidal attacks on medical personnel. Three authors who
have, however, are Harvard psychiatry professor Arthur Z. Berg,
University of Illinois at Chicago psychiatry and public health
professor Carl C. Bell, U-Cal. Davis psychiatry professor Joe Tupin.
In their article "Aspects of Violence: Issues in Prevention and
Treatment" (published in vol. 86 of the journal New Directions for
Mental Health Services, Summer 2000). Advising mental-health
workers on dealing with violent patients, Berg and his co-authors
explain:
The idea of
harming someone is foreign to most mental health workers. Nonviolent
methods that do not cause harm are appropriate for management of
aggressive patients. But when faced with serious bodily injury or
death, those methods may not apply. The clinician must be prepared
to do whatever violence is necessary to save himself or herself and
other. In these situations, "First do no harm" has no place.
Nevertheless,
the verbal attack on Carmona escalated when
Dr. James
Curran, the Dean of the Rollins School of Public Health at Emory
University weighed in. Because of Emory's proximity to the federal
Centers for Disease Control, also located Atlanta, its school of
public health tends to get a good deal of media attention.
Dean Curran
announced that he was not "proud that our surgeon general shoots
people." He denounced Carmona as "a cowboy."
Consistent with
Dean Curran's aversion to Carmona's use of a firearm, Emory University
has long served as a center of antigun propaganda, most notably from
Dr. Arthur Kellermann, a tireless producer of dubious
antigun factoids. More recently, Emory has become infamous as the
home of history professor Michael Bellesiles, author of the
now-exposed hoax book
Arming
America.
Because Dr.
Carmona was carrying a gun and knew how to use it, a violent criminal
died, and two or more innocent women and men survived. By the moral
calculus of most people, this would seem a very good result. Had Dr.
Carmona "done no harm" to the harmful predator, then the innocent
hostage would have been assaulted and perhaps murdered. The killer
might have gone to murder his ex-girlfriend, as well as any peace
officers (Carmona included) who attempted to interfere. To be
explicit: A dead male violent predator is a better public-health
result than several innocent women and men brutalized, severely
injured, and possibly murdered.
As Dean Curran's denunciation of the life-saving Dr. Carmona
highlights, "public health" is, in some hands, increasingly becoming
an instrument of moral intolerance, rather than of genuine public
health.
This is why the "public-health" campaign against guns and gun owners
tends to ignore or disparage lawful defensive uses of firearms against
criminals, or against genocidal governments — even though genocide is
surely the worst possible "health outcome."
Rather notably, many of the prime targets of today's "public-health"
puritans are same targets which have always been so bothersome to
people who insist that everyone live by a single standard of moral
purity: tobacco, alcohol, and food. But rather than make the
straightforward (and not implausible) moral arguments against smoking,
drinking, and gluttony, the "public health" puritans wrap their claims
in spurious factoids created by bogus research.
They campaign for smoking prohibition on the ludicrous grounds that
inhaling secondhand smoke is more dangerous than smoking cigarettes.
They campaign against alcohol by raising scare statistics about "binge
drinking" — and rather significantly, their "binge drinkers" include
people who drink at levels which leave them stone cold sober.
Likewise, the "public-health" puritans rail against gluttony — by
producing bogus statistics about "obesity" which define NFL
running-backs as "obese."
Of course there are many serious, dedicated public-health workers and
scholars who really do protect public health. The genuine health
professionals are busy fighting against infectious diseases,
monitoring the safety of drinking water, and studying how viruses
spread from one population to another.
Yet too often, the "public-health" voices which appear in the
newspapers aren't the voices of health advocacy, but the voices of
neo-puritanism, masked in public-health rhetoric and waving phony and
frightening statistics.
In a sense, Dean Curran's attack on Dr. Carmona serves the useful of
purpose of revealing how extreme the Puritans of Public Health Agenda
can be. It's not really about reducing how often innocents are harmed
by guns; the agenda won't even allow rampaging murderers to be harmed
with guns.
Our United States Senate, happily, found nothing immoral in Dr.
Carmona's record. Had Dr. Carmona ever performed an abortion, or if he
had ever volunteered at a pro-life medical counseling center, you can
be sure that at least a few senators would have found the doctor's
actions morally disturbing. But saving women by shooting a rampaging
murder — there's nothing at all morally disturbing about that — at
least according to the 98 United States senators who voted for Dr.
Carmona. (Two were absent.)
Dr. Richard Carmona is a physician and educator with demonstrated
ability under fire, both metaphorically and literally. He has stood in
that dark place where evil threatens, and he has prevailed. What
better person could serve as surgeon general for a nation at war?
— Dave Kopel is an NRO
contributing editor. Timothy Wheeler is president of
Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, a project of
The Claremont
Institute.
|