Distinguish between issues of "what can be done" and "what should be done" in real-life medical situations.

In real-life medical situations, the distinction between "what can be done" and "what should be done" is crucial. "What can be done" refers to the medical interventions and treatments that are available and technically feasible. This includes surgeries, medications, therapies, and other medical procedures that have the potential to address a patient's condition.

On the other hand, "what should be done" involves ethical, moral, and practical considerations. It takes into account the patient's best interests, their values and preferences, as well as the potential risks and benefits of different treatment options. This also includes considering the patient's quality of life, their ability to participate in decision-making, and the impact of treatment on their overall well-being.

For example, a patient may have a terminal illness and while there are medical interventions that can prolong their life, it may not be in their best interest to undergo aggressive treatments that will only cause suffering without improving their quality of life. In this case, the question of "what should be done" may involve focusing on palliative care and ensuring the patient's comfort and dignity.

Ultimately, the distinction between "what can be done" and "what should be done" requires healthcare professionals to consider not only the technical possibilities of medical care, but also the ethical and humanistic aspects of providing care to patients. It involves a holistic approach that takes into account the individual needs and circumstances of each patient, and aims to provide the most appropriate and compassionate care possible.