Austin Eby Medical Ethics Andrew Erickson March 19, 2015 Medical Paternalism Alan Goldman argues that medical paternalism is unjustified except in very rare cases. He states that disregarding patient autonomy, forcing patients to undergo procedures, and withholding important information regarding diagnoses and medical procedures is morally wrong. Goldman argues that it is more important to allow patients to have the ability to make autonomous decisions with their health and what treatment options if any they want to pursue. He argues that medical professionals must respect patient autonomy regardless of the results that may or may not be beneficial to a patient’s health. I will both offer an objection and support Goldman’s argument.
Then again, when consideration is declined the doctor must guarantee the patient has the ability to comprehend his or her decision, and that the dangers, advantages, and options have been properly disclosed to the patient. Also, the choice to reject care should not be the aftereffect of wrong weight or compulsion. At the point, when confronted with a patient who declines mind, the doctor must evaluate and report the persistent choice making. It is not sufficient to just clarify the dangers of declining the care and request that the patient rehash these dangers or to sign a structure. A full limit appraisal is a complex undertaking, and it is illogical for crisis, doctors do this in an occupied ED with a patient who may be uncooperative.
A practice commonly used in the medical field, “benevolent deception” is the act of physicians suppressing information about diagnoses in hopes of not causing patients emotional turmoil (Skloot 63). Benevolent deception is a contentious subject because when used, the bioethical principles of respect for autonomy and beneficence can conflict with each other. Respect for autonomy is when physicians acknowledge their patients’ abilities to make voluntary decisions on their own regarding their health care (McCormick 4). Meanwhile, beneficence is the duty of doctors to be of a benefit to patients, while also taking measures to prevent and remove harm from them (McCormick 5). When giving patients diagnoses, physicians need to follow these doctrines by creating a balance between telling the truth and providing hope, which is why some may mistakenly turn to benevolent deception as the answer.
Another aspect of respect for autonomy relates to failing to provide a patient with appropriate detail on the parameters of pain management. Particularly patients have a right to know ... ... middle of paper ... ..., Quill, T., Bordley, D., & Ladwig, S. (2009). Evaluation of a required palliative care rotation for internal medicine residents. Journal of palliative medicine, 12(2), 150-154. Petersen, A.
To eliminate unnecessary problems and consequences on others, some people feel it is wise to formulate and execute a living will. A living will should have requirements that can be carefully examined and easy to understand to represent exactly what a patient’s wishes are incase his or her health expiry is in a state where the laws are not the same as the state in which that patient’s living will was filed. Thus, if a patient has a living will and falls into a persistent vegetative state during the decision making process, only his or her wishes shou... ... middle of paper ... ...e outdated or inapplicable to the specific circumstances” (Schatz, 2010, 4). There are three different options of a healthcare proxy in a patient’s living will. First, the healthcare proxy does specify what is in the living will of their patient.
Grounds for this justification are in the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Therapeutic privilege is no longer deemed ethical as it disregards the moral principle respect for autonomy. For a patient to be able to act autonomously, the patient must possess a certain amount of knowledge regarding his/her healthcare. Doctors that engage in therapeutic privilege and withhold relevant information are not granting their patient the right to make autonomous choices regarding his/her prognosis or treatment options. This violates informed consent, in which the patient is adequately informed and granted disclosure.
One must evaluate all parties involved. It can be argued that do to the lack of documentation or communication of the physician this was an act of negligence. A jury can decide that lack of documentation is sufficient evidence in finding a physician guilty of negligence (Pozgar, 2009). When we look at the role of the defendant which was the pharmacist not the physician his duty goes above just filling prescriptions, the duty of a pharmacist is to monitor the patient’s medication. In order for him to have achieved this properly he should have made sure he contacted the physician for further information even if the physician failed to communicate with him.
While the choice of patient’s to refuse life-saving treatment may go against nursing ethical codes and beliefs to attempt and coerce them to get treatment is trespass and would conclude in legal action. “….then refusal of these interventions may be regarded as inappropriate, but in the case of a patient with capacity, the patient must have the ultimate authority to decide” (Volinsky). While my values of the worth of life and importance of action may be different than others, as a nurse I have to learn to set that aside and follow all codes of ethics whether I have a dilemma with them or not. Sometimes with ethics there is no right or wrong, but as a nurse we have to figure out where to draw the line in some cases. In conclusion, there are numerous legal and ethical issues apparent in the nursing practice.
The nurse functioned according to the standards of care an... ... middle of paper ... ... treatment, healthcare providers should think on legal and ethical terms and strive to avoid treatments that can be considered abusive to the patient. What is good for one patient may not be the best treatment for others. References Furlong, E. (2007). Right or Wrong. Legal and Ethical Issues and Decision-Making.
But it is not clear if the treatment will prove effective. George, unable to endure the reality of his illness and other detrimental issues, requests to discontinue treatment and be allowed to die. Respecting a person’s sovereignty is essential when working in the medical field. The “rules” of upholding one’s autonomy is to respect the privacy of others, to not lie, to maintain confidentiality, to obtain consent, and to advise one when needed. Physicians should dismiss a person lacking the capacity to make decisions for themselves however it will defy the “ to obtain consent” and “to respect the privacy of others”