News
Ethical debate as Israeli hospitals refuse to force-feed Palestinian hunger striker
A fierce debate on medical ethics ensued as Israeli doctors appeared unwilling to force-feed a hunger-striking Palestinian prisoner, despite a new law which permits such action.
Palestinian prisoners have long favoured hunger strikes as a form of protest, especially against their detention without trial. Israeli authorities wish to prevent Palestinian deaths in custody and have previously set detainees free to avoid the prospect. Just last month, Israel released Islamic Jihad activist Khader Adnan who had been on a 56-day hunger strike.
Such cases prompted the Knesset to approve a law which would allow force-feeding with permission from the Attorney General and if medical experts believe that irreparable damage would be caused by continuing to refuse food. The law was passed in a narrow 46-40 vote. Interior Minister Gilad Erdan said “hunger strikes of terrorists in prison have become a tool to pressure” Israel.
This week, Islamic Jihad member Mohammed Allan entered the 56th day of a hunger strike and was admitted to Soroka Hospital in Beer Sheva. However, doctors are reported to have refused to force-feed Allan on ethical grounds and he was moved to Barzilai Hospital in Ashkelon. Yesterday, Barzilai’s director Dr Hezi Levy said he too would not permit force-feeding, describing it as a “drastic measure that is incompatible with medical ethics” unless serving an “urgent life-saving need.”
The Israel Medical Association (IMA) also opposes the measure and has launched a Supreme Court appeal against the new law. IMA chairman Dr Leonid Eidelman said that he opposes force-feeding not only because it is performed without the patient’s consent, but because it is a highly painful procedure. He said it is tantamount to saying, “In order to save someone’s life, you must torture them.” Eidelman’s position though has been challenged by Prof. Gil Siegal, a prominent member of Israel’s National Bioethics Council, who said, “I’m embarrassed by a doctor who’d be willing to see a person die in the name of a political protest.”