Oncology Case Study Essay

Though the situation may look bleak, doctors need to take up the responsibility to be honest with their patients in order to honor the principle of respect for autonomy, and yet be beneficent by presenting a sense of realistic hope that treatment will succeed so that they will not easily give up on their chance of living. Only when there is a life-or-death emergency where there little time for the physician to react in both an autonomous and beneficent manner is when benevolent deception can be justified. In any other circumstances, the use of benevolent deception presents too many dangerous consequences that can negatively affect patients in a most devastating way.

One is which rule will he be following or breaking if he carried on with certain action. In this case, the doctors were breaking medical rules concerning patients. The other question would be if the rule was followed would it result in happiness. The doctors following the rule of injecting the patients without their consent would not be a pleasing thing. This will help determine that it is a wrongful action.

Doctor is considered as great people who are able to use their skills to care for patients; nonetheless, they can deviate from the good and become bad as well. In response to this malpractice, laws are there to protect patients from being harmed by the practice of a doctor. Giving the advantage of suing the doctor for malpractice creates a functioning barrier that affects the performance of a doctor. Malpractice laws create fear in the physician that it hinders them from performing in their maximum capacity. Although malpractice laws exist to protect the patient and perfect the medical practice of a doctor, it leads the doctors to practice defensive medicine.

While the previous statement is true, the medical professional is violating a patient’s future autonomy. For this reason, medical professionals have the right to act paternalistically, therefore medical paternalism is justified by means of future autonomy and obligations to promote patient

First, I will talk to my friend who did the mistake in a respectful and empathetic manner. I will let him know that medication dosage error is very serious and life threatening. The incident had happened before and it could possibly happen in the future. Even though, the patient did not experience any adverse effect about the dosage error that does not mean that we should just not care about it. As a nurse, we want to improve patient’s health and protect them from harm.

Doctors are supposed to be looking after the interests of their patients, and they sometimes see lying as the only way to skirt the policies of some HMO's. The author takes the position that it is morally and ethically wrong for doctors to lie to insurance companies. However, in the current health system, dishonest pays.

Had this been a situation where the provider had not agreed to the code of ethics, the outcome would have varied significantly since it is more challenging be held to a standard you did not agree to. Nonetheless since the provider had agreed to a code of ethics the recommendation is for the provider to enroll in a ProBe (Professional/Problem-Based Ethics) course (Purcell, 1977). Such a course focuses on healthcare ethics and would serve as a refresher course as well as provide practical applications of ethics issues. The role of professional disciplinary action should be to eliminate harm to the patient (non-maleficence), to help the professional advance for his/her own good (benefience) and for all occurances of ethics violations to be treated fair and like cases alike (justice). Only under the worst situations should an individual’s employment be recinded.

In this paper I will define what a disruptive physician is, examine the nature, challenges, magnitude of the problem, contributing factors, impact, and what can be done about disruptive physicians. Is disruptive physician behavior an issue in healthcare or is it simply “acceptable operating room behavior and potentially beneficial because it helps weed out those whom were really not suited for the best surgical care” (Sataloff, 2008). I know that as a future healthcare worker this statement concerns me. There are multiple reasons why it concerns me but the top reasons are what exactly is the behavior used to weed out these co-workers, if healthcare workers are able to do this when it is too far, and what is acceptable and professional behavior no matter the situation or environment. Disruptive physician behavior consists of a practice pattern of personality traits that interferes with the physician’s effective clinical performance (Norman T. Reynolds, 2012).

It gives the doctor condition of the patient he or she can’t do on the patient which might result to death. If a situation where it’s an emergency then the history and physical obtain can be used. Action Plan: 1. The hospital will identify the person responsible for assessing the patient immediately and submit the documentation to the nurse on duty to make sure it’s done and put in patient chart. This will identify the accountable parties.

The majo... ... middle of paper ... ... correctly used by doctors instead of the ways how lies are commonly told in modern day medical practice. Overall, today’s physicians should not assume what they believe is best for their patients and should be truthful in relaying news about medical conditions, even though the diagnoses may be grave. Though the situation may look bleak, what doctors should do is take up the responsibility to be honest with their patients in order to honor the principle of respect for autonomy, and yet be beneficent by presenting a sense of realistic hope that treatment will succeed so that patients will not easily give up on their chance of living. Instead of putting one bioethical principle over the other, as seen with benevolent deception, a balance should be made in most circumstances so that a patient can receive the honest health care information he or she rightfully deserves.