The lowest hanging fruit is the old-timey procedures that in retrospect were never justified in the first place. Like lobotomies. If 80 years ago a surgeon was removed from their position because a patient wanted a lobotomy and they wouldn't do it, history would look back kindly on them.
This is a slightly bizarre argument. Lobotomies were enforced on patients, mostly those who had been deemed incapable of making choices for themselves. A patient with the capacity to voluntarily ask for one was almost inherently not suitable for it. Just as an idea how rare and extreme it was, about 1% of the population are on antipsychotic drugs at any one time - so, say, ~3 million Americans - but the total number of lobotomies perfomed in the USA were in the low tens of thousands across over several decades. They were overwhelmingly on the most troubled (or, of course, troublesome for "carers").
In a sort of sense lobotomy still exists today, although it's called "psychosurgery", and is a vastly more refined, careful and reliable procedure. And, thankfully, exceptionally rare.
www.google.com
