Advertisement

Journal of Religion and Health

, Volume 55, Issue 4, pp 1426–1432 | Cite as

Medical Ethics in Qiṣāṣ (Eye-for-an-Eye) Punishment: An Islamic View; an Examination of Acid Throwing

  • Amir Alishahi Tabriz
  • Hossein Dabbagh
  • Harold G. Koenig
Original Paper

Abstract

Physicians in Islamic countries might be requested to participate in the Islamic legal code of qiṣāṣ, in which the victim or family has the right to an eye-for-an-eye retaliation. Qiṣāṣ is only used as a punishment in the case of murder or intentional physical injury. In situations such as throwing acid, the national legal system of some Islamic countries asks for assistance from physicians, because the punishment should be identical to the crime. The perpetrator could not be punished without a physician’s participation, because there is no way to guarantee that the sentence would be carried out without inflicting more injury than the initial victim had suffered. By examining two cases of acid throwing, this paper discusses issues related to physicians’ participation in qiṣāṣ from the perspective of medical ethics and Islamic Shari’a law. From the standpoint of medical ethics, physicians’ participation in qiṣāṣ is not appropriate. First, qiṣāṣ is in sharp contrast to the Hippocratic Oath and other codes of medical ethics. Second, by physicians’ participation in qiṣāṣ, medical practices are being used improperly to carry out government mandates. Third, physician participation in activities that cause intentional harm to people destroys the trust between patients and physicians and may adversely affect the patient–physician relationship more generally. From the standpoint of Shari’a, there is no consensus among Muslim scholars whether qiṣāṣ should be performed on every occasion. We argue that disallowing physician involvement in qiṣāṣ is necessary from the perspectives of both medical ethics and Shari’a law.

Keywords

Medical ethics Qiṣāṣ Capital punishment Islam Acid throwing 

References

  1. American Medical Association. (2006). Ethical Opinion E-2.06: Capital punishment. In Code of Medical Ethics of the American Medical Association (2006–2007 ed., pp. 19–20). Chicago, IL: American Medical Association.Google Scholar
  2. Athar, S. (2008). Enhancement technologies and the person: An Islamic view. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36(1), 59–64.Google Scholar
  3. Coady, C. A. J. (2009). Playing God. In J. Savulescu & N. Bostrom (Eds.), Human enhancement. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cohen, G. A. (2011). Rescuing conservatism. In Wallace & Kumar (Eds.), Reasons and recognition: Essays on the philosophy of T.M. Scanlon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Dworkin, R. (2002). Playing god. In Sovereign Virtue. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Habermas, J. (2003). The future of human nature. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Kahane, G. (2011). Mastery without Mystery: Why there is no Promethean Sin in Enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 28(4), 355–368.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Kahane, G. (2013). Designing children and respect for the given. In Proceedings of the 2012 Uehiro-Carnegie-Oxford Ethics Conference, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Khansary, S. A. (1405/1985). Jame’-al-madarek fi Sharhe Mokhtasar-al-nafe’. Sadough library, Tehran: Vol. VII, Book on Qiṣāṣ, p. 183.Google Scholar
  10. Needleman, J. (1985). The way of the physician (p. 68). Newyork: Harper & Row Publisher.Google Scholar
  11. Sachedina, A. (2009). Islamic biomedical ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Sandel, M. (2007). The case against perfection. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Soroush, A. (2002). Reason, freedom, and democracy in Islam. Oxford University Press, Chaps. 2, 7 & 12.Google Scholar
  14. Soroush, A. (2009). The expansion of prophetic experience: Essays on historicity, contingency and plurality in religion. Leiden, Boston: Brill, Chaps. 4 & 12.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amir Alishahi Tabriz
    • 1
  • Hossein Dabbagh
    • 2
  • Harold G. Koenig
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Health Policy and Management, The Gillings School of Global Public HealthUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Centre for Socio-Legal StudiesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  3. 3.Duke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations