Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Autonomy in patient's rights
Autonomous as a personal trait
Patient autonomy is MOST accurately defined
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
On the morning of May 17th, 2005, Nola Walker was involved in a two-car collision. Police and Ambulance were dispatched and arrive on scene at the intersection of Kenny and Fernley Street. Ambulance conducted various assessments on Ms. Walker which revealed no major injuries and normal vital signs. Mrs walker denied further medical investigation and denied hospital treatment. Later on, Queensland police conducted a roadside breath test that returned a positive reading, police then escorted Ms. Walker to the cairns police station. Ms. Walker was found to be unconscious, without a pulse and not breathing. An ambulance was called but attempts to revive her failed (Coroner’s Inquest, Walker 2007). The standard of Legal and ethical obligation appeared by paramedics required for this situation are flawed and require further examination to conclude whether commitments of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice were accomplished. Autonomy is a concept found in moral, political, and bioethical reasoning. Inside these connections, it is the limit of a sound individual to make an educated, unpressured decision. Patient autonomy can conflict with clinician autonomy and, in such a clash of values, it is not obvious which should prevail. (Lantos, Matlock & Wendler, 2011). In order to gain informed consent, a patient …show more content…
Paramedics deemed the patient competent and therefore Ms. Walker had the right to refuse treatment, which held paramedics legally and ethically bound to her decisions. Although negligent actions were identified which may have resulted in a substandard patient treatment, paramedics acted with intent to better the patient despite unforeseen future factors. There is no set structure paramedics can follow in an ethical and legal standpoint thus paramedics must tailor them to every given
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. I will
Healthcare creates unique dilemmas that must consider the common good of every patient. Medical professionals, on a frequent basis, face situations that require complicated, and at times, difficult decision-making. The medical matters they decide on are often sensitive and critical in regards to patient needs and care. In the Case of Marguerite M and the Angiogram, the medical team in both cases were faced with the critical question of which patient gets the necessary medical care when resources are limited. In like manner, when one patient receives the appropriate care at the expense of another, medical professionals face the possibility of liability and litigation. These medical circumstances place a burden on the healthcare professionals to think and act in the best interest of the patient while still considering the ethical and legal issues they may confront as a result of their choices and actions. Medical ethics and law are always evolving as rapid advances in all areas of healthcare take place.
Patient autonomy was the predominant concern during the time of publication of both Ezekiel and Linda Emanuel, and Edmund D. Pellegrino and David C. Thomasma's texts. During that time, the paternalistic model, in which a doctor uses their skills to understand the disease and choose a best course of action for the patient to take, had been replaced by the informative model, one which centered around patient autonomy. The latter model featured a relationship where the control over medical decisions was solely given to the patient and the doctor was reduced to a technical expert. Pellegrino and Thomasma and the Emanuel’s found that the shift from one extreme, the paternalistic model, to the other, the informative model, did not adequately move towards an ideal model. The problem with the informative model, according to the Emanuel’s, is that the autonomy described is simple, which means the model “presupposes that p...
Ian Shine, Administrator vs Jose Vega & another touches on a very delicate issue. The right of the patient to refuse treatment and the responsibility of the physician to administer treatment. The right of a competent adult to refuse medical treatment should always be respected even if the physician assumes the situation to be life threatening. In this case, Dr. Vega actions cannot be justified. Dr. Vega never discussed the risk or the benefits of intubation with Catherine 2(patient). Even if Catherine was believed to be incompetent to consent, Dr. Vega should have petitioned consent from Catherine’s sister, who was present at the time, he did not. As a result, Catherine was restrained and forced to receive a treatment that she as a competent adult had objected to.
Within public health, the issue of paternalism has become a controversial topic. Questions about the ethics of public health are being asked. The role of ethics in medical practice is now receiving close scrutiny, so it is timely that ethical concepts, such as autonomy and paternalism, be re-examined in their applied context (Med J Aust. 1994). Clinically, patients are treated on a one on one basis, but public health’s obligation is toward the protection and promotion of an entire population’s health. So, based on this difference, the gaping questions targeting public health now becomes, under what conditions is it right to intervene and override an individuals’ autonomy?
In this essay the author will rationalize the relevance of professional, ethical and legal regulations in the practice of nursing. The author will discuss and analyze the chosen scenario and critically review the action taken in the expense of the patient and the care workers. In addition, the author will also evaluates the strength and limitations of the scenario in a broader issue with reasonable judgement supported by theories and principles of ethical and legal standards.
Charlotte’s parents thought otherwise, the Ethics Advisory Committee had to get involved. The debate surrounded if the doctors were in the right to control the life of someone who were incapable of deciding themselves, or is it the parents right. The Ethics Advisory Committee, stated that the parents were superior to those of the hospital and the hospital should conduct with less painful test. Charlotte’s parents wanted the doctors to continue testing until it was determined that her life diffidently had no chance of remaining. Because, of Charlotte’s parents’ desires unfortunately caused Charlotte to die a painful death without her parents. If the patient is unable to speak for their selves, the family should be able to have some say in the medical treatment, however; if the doctors have tried everything they could do, the hospital should have final decisions whether or not the patient dies or treatment
Health professionals are constantly working on improvements because of ethical concerns that they face in their everyday lives. The relationship between a physician and a patient is often seen as a relationship with no errors or ethical concerns but that is not the case. There are constant adjustments that are made to ensure everyone is accounted for and treated in a humane manner. Although the health system focuses on accommodating for everyone, there are many times that adolescents suffer due to their inability to make their own decisions in a health setting. Adolescents do not have the ability to make their own decisions towards their health without parental or guardian consents and many times they also base their final decision on the bias opinions of their physician or parent/guardians. Some important key concepts to understand when analyzing this issue is what paternalism and autonomy means. Autonomy is when a person can freely make their own decisions and paternalism is when someone disregards a person’s decision, and does not allow autonomy (Vaughn,71). It is important to realize that promoting adolescent autonomy at an early age allows adolescents to practice self-care and be well informed about medical procedures (Beacham & Deatrick, 2013). In order to prevent these issues from
Personal autonomy refers to the capacity to think, decide and act on one's own free initiative (Patient confidentiality & divulging patient information to third parties, 1996). For a patient’s choice to be an autonomous choice, the patient must make his choice voluntarily (free of controlling constraints), his choice must be adequately informed, and the patient must have decision-making capacity (he must be competent) (Paola, 2010), therefore Physicians and family members should help the patient come to his own decision by providing full information; they should also uphold a competent, adult patient's decision, even if it appears medically wrong (Patient confidentiality & divulging patient information to third parties, 1996).
“ Personal autonomy over important decisions in one’s life, the ability to attempt to realize one’s own value ordering, is indeed so important that normally no amount of other goods pleasures or avoidance of personal evils can take precedence.” The ultimate goal here is for the patient to remain autonomous. Contrary to what physicians thought of patients in the past, most patients today do want to know the status of their health, and can use this information to live their lives in a way that is the most meaningful to them. Withholding such information not only prohibits a patient from making fully informed healthcare decisions but it also violates the patient’s rights. In short, there is no way of ever knowing a person’s value scale, or what gives them reason to live the way they choose to. Although it can be argued that disclosure of certain information being given to a patient regarding health could induce anxiety or uncertainty. In the end, it is their right to know about the information because it is a necessary element that is required to make decisions regarding their healthcare. On that note, there are various other situations in life that can produce the same feelings mentioned before, regardless, as humans we tend to take chances with everything we do without ever fully knowing the results until we are faced with them. Autonomy is a fundamental right that allows us to make these decisions for ourselves. Without it, we are powerless to make decisions for
The purpose f this paper is to answer the following question- where does patient autonomy leave off and professional expertise begin in the practice of medicine? Also, a brief personal analysis about the differences between doctors encouraging patients to question their judgment and doctors who believe that such deference is “pandering.”
The Lewis Blackman Case: Ethics, Law, and Implications for the Future Medical errors in decision making that result in harm or death are tragic and costly to the families affected. There are also negative impacts to the medical providers and the associated institutions (Wu, 2000). Patient safety is a cornerstone of higher-quality health care and nurses serve as a communication link in all settings which is critical in surveillance and coordination to reduce adverse outcomes (Mitchell, 2008). The Lewis Blackman Case 1 of 1 point accrued
Morrison, E. E. (2011). Justice for Patients. In Ethics in Heatlh Administration-A Practical Approach for Decision Makers (p. 66). Sudbury, Massachusetts, United States of America: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Case #2 is a perfect example of a case that causes one to question which ethical principles are most important and to whom those principles should be applied. Case #2 involves Jane Trause who has had a history of drug use and is currently pregnant. Upon being admitted into labor and delivery, it quickly becomes evident to medical staff that the fetus is medically unstable and needs to be delivered immediately. However, it is determined by the medical staff that the baby will not survive a natural delivery and that the only way the baby will be born alive is by a C-section. Jane and her husband Doug adamantly refuse to allow a C-section and remind the staff that they have a right to refuse treatment. The residents of the hospital must decide if they can morally respect Jane’s autonomy and allow her to deliver naturally, while putting the fetus’ life in jeopardy or if they will override Jane’s wishes and perform the C-section without her permission to ensure a safe delivery.
Patient autonomy is “the right of patients to make decisions about their medical care without their health care provider trying to influence the decision. Patient autonomy does allow for health care providers to educate the patient but does not allow the health care provider to make the decision for the patient” (Patient Autonomy, n.d.). In this case, the conflict to be resolved was “the right of a competent adult to refuse medical treatment and the interest of a physician in preserving life without fear of liability” (Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1999). We must remember that Jesus Christ is our head and lawgiver. Our self-rule is to be with Him, with no outside interference in harmony with His laws. A symposium of