The Hippocratic Oath Under Pressure: Ethical Reflections on Physician Responsibility in the JFK Autopsy

Abstract

Importance: The assassination of President John F. Kennedy remains one of the most debated medical events of the twentieth century. Conflicting medical observations and institutional constraints surrounding the autopsy raise enduring ethical questions about physician autonomy and the obligations of the Hippocratic Oath. Objective: To examine the ethical implications of contested medical evidence in the JFK case and to analyze how institutional pressures may affect physician judgment, documentation, and professional responsibility. Evidence Review: Published medical analyses, radiological evaluations, eyewitness accounts, and philosophical work on epistemic responsibility and moral agency were reviewed to assess the ethical challenges faced by physicians involved in the JFK autopsy. Findings: Documented discrepancies between clinical observations at Parkland Hospital and the official autopsy findings at Bethesda Naval Hospital have been noted in the literature. Analyses have also identified radiological and photographic inconsistencies. Philosophical frameworks highlight the ethical obligations of physicians to maintain independent judgment and resist coercive pressures. Conclusions and Relevance: The JFK case illustrates the ethical challenges physicians may face when evidence is contested or when institutional authority constrains professional autonomy. The case underscores the importance of transparency, accurate documentation, and ethical preparedness in politically sensitive medical contexts.