It is vital that the healthcare professionals to be sensitive to patients’ cultural and spiritual beliefs as well as knowing the law when it involves children health. It is important to find right approach and build a trusting relationship with a child and his/her parents by ethically initiating communication and explanation of the best possible choices for the patient. No doubt parents’ decision-making rights should be recognized and taken into account, but the medical personnel should not ignore any suspected cases of medical neglect or abuse. Sometimes the state authorities have to get involved in order for children to get treated. Right to practice any religion is very respected in this country. Some parents refuse medical treatment based on their religious and spiritual beliefs, but when it comes to treatment that might prevent death or severe impairment or alleviate excruciating pain, children’s health and future autonomy should be defended. Because religious exemptions to child abuse and neglect laws do not equally protect all children and may harm some children, these exemptions should be repealed. …show more content…
These exemptions appeared as reaction to the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974. The act stated, “Provided, however, that a parent or guardian legitimately practicing his religious beliefs who thereby does not provide specified medical treatment for a child, for that reason alone shall not be considered a negligent parent or guardian” (Child Abuse, 1975). Application of exemptions was a method used by the states to collect federal child abuse grants. More than 40 states adopted exemptions, it slightly differs in where they can be found within each state’s code and sentence formulation (Malecha, 1985). Some of the exemption involve child protective services agencies’ ability to intervene, and others reflect parents’ criminal
...s driven by non-maleficence, or the intent to “do no harm”. They know that withholding treatment for religious beliefs will potentially be fatal to both. While Maria is acting out of loyalty to her religious beliefs, the medical staff is acting out of loyalty to the patient’s well being and that of her unborn child. It would be unfair if no party were acting on behalf of that child. In conclusion, providers in this case must pursue every option in delivering life saving treatment for this child. This may involve legal action. If it were just Maria providers may attempt to influence her decision, but ultimately it would be up to her to refuse suggested treatment. Since her decision affects the life of the baby providers are called upon to save that child .
Although only a small percentage of children are dying from faith-healing practices, the awareness needs to be brought to the public. Faith in a religion has many benefits but the idea of abandoning medicine is bad for ones wellbeing. Precautionary signs of illness in infants must be treated immediately. Medicine alongside faith is the ideal situation in which many lives will be saved. Holding faith has proven to be positive for many people but one must take cautionary action when treating illnesses with faith healing as their only medicine. Faith healing and medicine collectively used with one another can yield the highest rates of recovery and general wellbeing, through reducing stress, relieving pain and anxiety, and increasing the desire to live. When the human body is able to release these stressors, one’s health has an increased rate of being cured.
All branches of military service can fully expect full-length beards, tattoos, piercings, and turbans amongst the ranks of military service members while in uniform! Senior leaders should be aware of Department of Defense (DOD) policy change in regards to religious accommodations of service members, because of the impact these changes will have on all branches of the armed forces of the United States. This paper will state the background related to the DOD religious accommodation policy, discuss the effects on uniform standards, and provide recommendations for change to the current policy.
Religious Discrimination according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, involves treating a person (applicant or employee) unfavorably because of his or her religious beliefs. It can also involve treating someone differently because that person is married to or associated with an individual of a particular religion or because of his or her connection with a religious organization/group. Today, most twenty-first century managers are familiar with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which states that failing or refusing to accommodate an employee’s religious practices, or taking adverse employment action based on a person’s religion can result in charges of discrimination (EEOC). Therefore, managers should not use or inquire about an individual’s religious beliefs unless an accommodation is requested.
Religious Freedom Restoration Act In this paper I will describe the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. This Act was used to contradict the decision of the court case of Employment Division v. Smith, which allowed the government to forbid any religious act without giving a reason. The RFRA brought back the requirement that the government provide an adequate reason to forbid any religious act. The government once again had to show that the act was of compelling interest to the state.
Parents have moral and legal obligation to take care of their child and provide him with food, shelter and necessary medical care. After the divorce, the child will live with one parent who will have legal and physical custody. In times of emergency most contentious philosophical and religious beliefs requires compromise. In a situation when former spouses disagree on the practice of conventional medicine, the family attorney will be able to assist to reach an agreement.“But while adult patients can refuse treatments on grounds of faith, the religious convictions of a child—or of their parents—are not an acceptable legal defense against withholding lifesaving treatment” (When Parents Disagree on Medical Care for Their Children. (2013).
The case of 17-month old Emilio Gonzales was seen and heard nation wide. A conflict between the mother and the physician emerged after the physician no longer expected there be an improvement in his health. This led to the decision of discontinuing providing care for the child and requesting the parents find another facility willing to provide such medical care. The main issue of this case revolved around whether the physician’s decision was morally permissible or legally just. Under Kantian Ethics, Children’s Hospital has moral reasoning to terminate treatment for Emilio and thus is morally justified in withdrawing treatment.
Some patients refuse to take certain medical services, and some staff members refuse to provide certain services. In both cases, they feel that medical intervention can go too far into conflict with their religious beliefs or personal moral convictions. The hospital can not make patients take medical services, but we can control the employees. The patients will be advised to take the recommended medical service and if they refuse it will be their choice. No employee should be allowed to act upon his or her own beliefs.
Suspected child abuse must be recognized, comprehensive and carefully examined, evaluated, and followed up on. The most important factor is to make sure that the child is immediately protected and safety is provided. The physician is responsible for reporting, documenting, and providing the necessary information and exalted his or her expertise to investigate. It is up to the medical team to prevent abuse. Finally physicians must advocate that children who have a medical or mental problem receive the appropriate services and medications and continuity of
A child’s guardian or parent ignores the signs of an abused child, which leads to a malfunction to the child. The guardian or parent fails to seek a psychological therapist which can help intervene to cause less psychological problems. The mistreatment that the child received affects a child’s mentality, brain size, and development due to the lack of a psychological therapist. The abuse that a child receives causes a child to malfunction, since they felt that they were not protected and were harmed. Although people state that one knows the meaning of abuse, yet they lack the extent and limitations of the term “abuse.” According to the article of “Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect”, the definition is clearly stated by the government of what should be considered abuse and neglect which consists, “Any recent act or failure to act on
The principle of autonomy states, that an individual’s decision must be respected in all cases, also an individual can act freely in accordance to their plan. For example, in a case where a patient and family demands to continue medical or surgical care and a physician want the patient to stop further treatment. In this case the patient’s choice will matter the most. According to the principle of autonomy it will be the patients and family choice whether to continue or discontinue treatment. The principle of beneficence which states, “one must promote good” comes into play in this case. In accordance to beneficence the patient will not benefit from the physicians responses personally. He/she will not benefit from harming her body with more surgeries. The patient will be going against the principle non-maleficence, which states that “one must cause no harm to an individual” by causing harm to herself. In this case the physician is justified in his/her actions by discontinuing medical or surgical care to the patient because it will not it her. These principles are what healthcare provider use to help and guide patients with the ...
They will need to have an understanding of their spiritual and religion aspects, practiced by the patients and their family members. With having the understanding of the patient’s beliefs, the patient may consider the treatment from the health care provider. It is very crucial and imperative the health care providers listen to all aspects of the patients’ lives, which will affec...
The Hippocratic Oath is taken by medical professionals to treat those who are in need to the best of one’s ability (1). Established by Hippocrates in the early 5th century B.C., the oath has been upheld through the centuries regarding Hippocrates as the father of medicine throughout the world. To medical students, it stands almost as a right of passage when graduating with ones degree and entering into the medical field. However, according to the new laws in modern medicine, the code cannot be upheld to its entirety (1). Patients legally have the right to refuse treatment, even against the educated judgment of their physicians. The patient has the right to express their religious views if the proposed treatment conflicts with their beliefs. Abortion and End-of-Life decisions have ethical and religious conflicts that have been disputed for years, even banned in many areas. There are the implications of a patient that is unfit to give judgment on treatment, such as patients that are under the influence of drugs and alcohol. The medical community is presumed to respect the views of their patients, but ethical conscience may blur the lines of what is right and wrong. Or are the physicians motivated by their own concerns of self worth?
...healing process of the patient. Healthcare professionals should frequently ask questions in order to fully understand if certain needs are to be met because of religious practices or beliefs. For example, a fresh bed sheet can be offered to a Muslim in order for a clean space for their daily prayers (pg. 21, Singh, 2009). Certain medical decisions can be difficult to finalize since religion must be taken into consideration. Healthcare providers will come into contact with people of different faiths, nationalities and cultures. All patients should be treated with the same amount of respect and acceptance in order for their medical needs to be fairly met.
...e upon a painful treatment the child is in no position to tell them otherwise. “According to a traditional Confucian interpretation, a child who agrees to a parent’s refusal of treatment would be violating the principle of filial piety” (Bowman). This makes the children very inactive in their own situation’s outcome. Therefore children and doctors do not have a very direct relationship and the communication is left to be between the older people of the patient’s family and the doctor resulting in a more technically based and advanced language.