Did these medical personnel play God?

If there was no hope, it was justified. It wasn't right, but there was at least a good reason. There's no point in keeping someone alive when the chances of them pulling through a very slim. It's better to end their lives quickly so you can focus on those who need the help, and who can actually benefit from it.

Under any other conditions, there would likely be no justification. But this is a special case.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Never said that.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Interrobang

It's the logical extension of your justification, regardless of whether you support it.

Fair enough. Mind you, I simply used the word "justified," as in they're free of (personal) guilt. Nothing more. I'm sure it was a hasty decision made under pressure and stress; they were in a tight situation with very little resources to spare. They decided quickly, maybe wrongly, but I don't think they're completely to blame.

Whether it's a "logical extension" of my justification or not doesn't matter. You're putting words in my mouth that I never intended, nor implied.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

How is withholding treatment any different than giving them a lethal cocktail? According to you, the patients are under the doctors' care, meaning they should do what they can to save them or prolong their death, right? They, most likely, had the means to do at least one or the either, but they didn't. So in this case, letting them die and out-right killing them isn't any different. So that should be fairly irrelevant.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?