Punishing someone for a crime is the responsibility of the justice system. You are saying hospital administrators should basically be able to hand out death sentences at their discretion, which is a bizarre line of thought.

> to me it honestly seems pretty reasonable if hospitals were to lower the priority of people who've been convicted of serious, deliberate violent offenses (where "serious" can be rigorously defined based on charges/sentences), given the very limited supply and high demand. Perhaps even restrict it to cases where the victim died, like this one.

Why would anyone want to add complexity to triage would be my knee jerk wonder, it’s supposed to be a quick process

Would the hospital need to wait for the legal system to get back to them before treatment can begin? How would you know if the patient has committed a crime without waiting?

How would you ever remove human bias from such a system? This is a non-starter.

Right, imagine someone convicted of possession of marijuana. There are still plenty of people who consider marijuana on par with hard drugs and serious crime. In their eyes, someone convicted of possession may as well be on par with murderers.

For the record, my original comment before I deleted it was exclusively referring to cases of deliberate violent crimes, with a caveat that it should probably be restricted to just homicide.