Golubchuck's doctors have recommended that he be removed from life support, but his family has fought that in court. They are Orthodox Jews, and their beliefs strictly forbid the hastening of a death.
On Monday, doctors Bojan Paunovic and David Easton became the second and third doctors to stop accepting shifts at Grace Hospital's critical care unit.
Dr. Anand Kumar had told Golubchuck's family it would be best to take him off life support because he has minimal brain function and his chances of recovery are slim.
In his resignation letter, Kumar detailed how doctors had to "surgically hack away at Golubchuck's infected flesh" because of ulcers on his skin. He likened the treatment to torture.
"It would be against their religious convictions not to fight for life and there is life and they are fighting," Kravetsky told CTV Winnipeg.
I also read in the newspaper (I can't find the same article online) that that hospital had to close down two ICU beds in order to come up with the resources to keep the man alive, and that the average ICU patient costs $2000/day to keep alive.
Do you think the doctors had a right to refuse treatment? Do you think their medical oaths and/or personal ethics should trump the family's religious beliefs?
Do you think that the healthcare system has the right to cut off treatment and indirectly kill him? Do you think that the family has the right to put more strain on an already strained healthcare system and use up resources that could be used to help someone else who does have a chance at recovery, when he's likely dead in all but body?
What should happen when a person's religious beliefs (the family's belief that cutting off life support would be murder) cross the line into impeding on the rights and beliefs of others (the doctors' belief that keeping him alive is torture, and the rights of other people to use the resources that he's taking up)?