02真题阅读中一段话的理解问题

2002年 TEXT4中一段话：

Nancy Dubler, director of Montefiore Medical Center, contends that the principle will shield doctors who "until now have very, very strongly insisted that they could not give patients sufficient mediation to control their pain if that might hasten death."


这句话开头部分说“南希认为这项原则能保护一些医生”，根据前文知这些医生是那些给病人开足够量的药物来给止痛的。

而本句话后面说，“那些医生坚持认为，在大量药物可能加速病人死亡的情况下，他们不能给病人开足够量的药来止痛。”

我在这里纠结了很久。句子前面说原则保护那些给病人开足够药的医生，后面又说这些医生不给病人开足够药....

不知道自己哪里理解错误，希望能得到指点。

结合前面一段的内容……

原帖由 sudapapa 于 2009-9-4 22:16 发表
结合前面一段的内容……

前3段如下：

The Supreme Court\'s decisions on physician-assisted suicide carry important implications for how medicine seeks to relieve dying patients of pain and suffering.

Although it ruled that there is no constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide, the Court in effect supported the medical principle of “double effect,\" a centuries-old moral principle holding that an action having two effects—a good one that is intended and a harmful one that is foreseen—is permissible if the actor intends only the good effect.

Doctors have used that principle in recent years to justify using high doses of morphine to control terminally ill patients\' pain, even though increasingdosages will eventually kill the patient.


第三段写了，很多医生利用者个原则使他们“给病人开加大剂量的吗啡止痛”的行为得以开脱，尽管这种行为会最终导致病人挂掉。

紧接着就是1L的那段。南希认为原则能保护一些医生，指的应该就是第三段提到的那一类医生...但是第四段后半部分那个定语从句部分又说那些医生认为不能给病人开大量药物.....
还是理解不能啊~

[ 本帖最后由 281601328 于 2009-9-4 22:49 编辑 ]

Nancy Dubler, director of Montefiore Medical Center, contends that the principle will shield doctors 【who \"until now have very, very strongly insisted that they could not give patients sufficient mediation to control their pain if that might hasten death.\"】
【】中的内容修饰前面doctors……
1楼长长的一段话其实级一个主干句子：Nancy Dubler contends that the principle will shield doctors

纠结纠结啊

主要是until now把，然后加have insisted,表示insisted是以前的想法了，直到现在有了新规定才改变想法

原则保护的医生只是一部分给病人开足够药的医生，这部分医生是“之前不会过量用药”的那一类