should health care workers undergo treatment with high risk of complications?

Question

3 It describes the interesting case of a nurse, working in a hospital in Den Bosch, who remained MRSA positive, even after treatment with various antibiotics. Here follows a translation of a statement by the bacteriologist, A Leenders, contained in that article: "One of the nurses, on her own initiative, suggested to the specialist that she should have her tonsils removed, because it was suspected that the MRSA resided in this organ. At the time it was uncertain whether the operation would change the MRSA status of the nurse. After the tonsillectomy, tests showed that the health worker had become MRSA negative. This indicates how far people will go. They have chosen to work in health care and they do not allow a bacterium to interfere with their vocation". I find this an altruistic attitude, but it does raise the moral question whether health care workers should undergo medical treatment with its inherent risks of complications, for the sake of the patients in their care?

Answer 1

She basically was a "typhoid Mary". An asymptomatic carrier. She would have also been putting her family and loved ones at risk, so I do not think it was all that altruistic. I am in health care as well.

Answer 2

That is easier to answer if we remember that we have to balance the risk-benefit of the intervention. In this case, the benefit was greater than the risk...(but when the consequences are not known, it is up to the one that will undergo it to give it a try)

That is the rule for any patient.