...every episode, I should think. But while that's true, I would note that every specific time I can recall House deciding that the ends justified the means, the ends were still "the good of his particular patient", rather than the 4x6 example quoted above or Wakefield, who were using their patients as instrumentalities towards other ends. So that seems to be the line that he draws.

(Of course, being somewhat of a cynic with regard to where the boundary between safeguards against malpractice that protect the patient from harm and the safeguards against malpractice that protect others from legal liability tends to be, vide. for example the unavailability of experimental treatments even to people whose choice is "...or death", my sympathies lie several steps House-ward of yours, I suspect.

If slightly bounded by the non-fictional world geniuses with his consistent success rate...)