See this question, suddenly have a very heartbreaking feeling, from the bottom line of morality, not because the patient failed to pay in time to turn off the instrument, out of the heart of the medical practitioner, not because the patient does not have the money to treat the treatment to stop treatment.
From the point of view of economic efficiency, hospitals are not charitable organizations, and they also need a great deal of financial expenses to maintain their operations; doctors' salaries have to be paid, and they have to buy all sorts of advanced medical equipment and all sorts of medicines.
If a normal operation of the hospital, if the patients accounted for more than 1/3 of this situation, is not able to pay the medical fees, if the hospital continues to treat the situation, will face a loss, this part of the medical fees only the hospital to pay for their own, belonging to the hospital of which department will be paid.
So this in itself is a contradiction in terms, or in most people's mental scales will be biased in favor of not stopping treatment, in fact, every year the hospital will face such a situation, the patient does not have the ability to pay the medical fees, and the hospital will open a green channel to continue to treat the patient, but the patient did not have to pay the ability to pay, so the hospital has to bear the burden itself.
For this situation, it should be different from person to person, different from disease to disease, it is necessary to see what disease the patient has, there is no significance to continue treatment, if the patient has arrived, is to rely on the machine to maintain life, and the patient is not able to pay the expensive medical fees, in such a situation, you can go to talk to the patient's family to talk about the condition from the actual situation, and then the patient's family to decide whether or not to pay the medical fees. The patient's family will have to decide whether or not to treat the patient.
If the patient has a disease that can continue to be treated, the treatment should not be stopped, the hospital can communicate with the family, the family or and the hospital can work together through different channels and platforms for fundraising, as far as possible to save the patient's life, which is the way of the healer's benevolence.
The specific situation should be analyzed specifically, according to the patient's situation and condition to make a choice, can not be generalized, from the essence of moral goodness, the hospital should not turn off the meter to stop treatment.
The hospital is a place to save lives, the doctor is to save lives, is to give hope to the patient, life, and live is everyone's instinct, no one has the right to erase this instinct.
As the patient's family, but also to find ways to raise medical expenses, to borrow from relatives around the loved ones, through the platform or media organizations to raise funds, can not let the hospital to save the patient at the same time, but also for you to carry a body of medical expenses, which is also unethical.