Throughout all things medical, privacy is most important. The concern here is why camera crews are allowed into a facility that is supposed to make you feel like you’re protected. A person has the right to themselves, so who determines whether or not you have that right? Just because a person is unconscious doesn’t mean their privacy should be invaded. Whether unconscious or not, consent was not formally, or previously agreed too. There are many factors at play here, but I will be touching on those a little more throughout the essay. Privacy sticks out to me in an important way, without it we all would know every little detail of everyone’s lives.
Most of the introduction paragraph brings out my main point which is, where is the privacy factor
…show more content…
They are sworn to protect their patients through these privacy measures. Mr. Chanko had the right to quality health care the question here is, did he get “quality” health care? I mentioned before, that the attending physician could have been distracted by the camera crews, while trying to tend to Mr. Chanko. The doctors also have duties to carry out these rules and regulations on behalf of their patients. Mr. Chanko clearly did not consent to having camera crews there, thus saying that the crew shouldn’t have been there in the first place. The physician should have did the right thing and turned them away to provide his utmost attention to the patient at risk. The decision being entirely up to the physician because his patient was unresponsive isn’t grounds enough to allow crews to film Mr. Chank fighting for his life. The emotional effects these actions will have on the family are detrimental. The hospital isn’t the one that has to grieve this horrific loss the family is going …show more content…
They could also say that they took protective measures to protect the patient and the family of the patient. However, the article stated that the wife was still able to tell it was her husband fighting for his life, and the article also said friends of the family noticed it too. Clearly his privacy wasn’t protected beings his wife, children, and friends new who he was right away. Although they thought his privacy was protected, where was the consent from Mr. Chanko to even be able to film him? There wasn’t, he wasn’t able to give consent because unfortunately he was fighting for his life. I question the judgement of the doctors, the hospital, and the media crew. I question this because of their moral judgement, and reasoning behind why they allowed the media to enter the hospital and film people. When people go visit their doctor, they feel they have exposed themselves; from being in gowns, having examinations, giving out personal information, poked and prodded. I just don’t understand how someone can overrule the patient’s rights and dignity by deciding it was ok to allow to film the incident until his death was pronounced, it is extremely
When confidential patient information is disclosed without consent it is a violation of the HIPAA Title II Security Rule. This rule was enacted in response to private information being leaked to the news and emails containing privileged information were read by unauthorized people. Identity theft is a real concern so patient privacy should be taken seriously. This is a rule can easily be broken without the offender feeling any malice towards the victim for example gossip and curiosity. Gossip in a medical office can have devastating effects on a health care facility’s reputation. Employees engaging in idle chatter to pass the time can inadvertently be overheard by patients or family members. Simply not using the patient’s name may not be enough if the person overhearing the conversation sees the resemblance. Professional behavior should be exercised at all times and juvenile behavior such as spreading gossip, has no place in a business that relies on its credibility. This rule will impact the way patient medical records are handled because we know the seriousness of it. Hospitals that don’t enforce HIPAA rules will have negative repercussions. The patient can have irreversible damage done to their view on the medical field and that hospital if their information is not treated with care. They may even feel so violated that they bring litigation against the hospital.
Learning from what Dr. Anna Pou had to face with the lawsuits she was dealing with makes me cringe. As Healthcare professionals, having to worry of possibly being sued for believing what is right for the patient or as a whole for the hospitals health is ridiculous. Healthcare professionals like Dr. Pou, have taken the Hippocratic oath, and one of the promises made within that oath is “first, do no harm”. Often time’s society look at courts cases as a battle versus two oppositions, but Dr. Pou’s case it is not. In her statements from national television she states saying her role was to ‘‘help’’ patients ‘‘through their pain,’’.
Schmeida, M. (2005). HIPAA of 1996: Just an Incremental Step in Reshaping Government. Retrieved January 25, 2011, from American Nursing Association Web Site: http://www.nursingworld.org
According to Terrence F. Ackerman, as of the 1980s the American Medical Association had to include the respect for a person’s autonomy as a principle of medical ethics (Ackerman 14, 1982). This includes having the physician provide all the medical information to the patient even if the information could cause negative implication onto the patient. The physician is also expected to withhold all information of the patient from 3rd parties (Ackerman 14, 1982). Although it is seen as standard in today’s world, in
In looking at these instances, the doctors seemed to have thought their actions normal. They thought that since they were treating the patient they automatically had access to their cells, tissues, DNA, that they could take without permission and use to develop science or to even become rich and famous like Dr. Golde tried to do. One might say that no matter how useful a person's biological property can be to western medicine and science, it does not excuse the violation of privacy of a patient. Ostensibly, there is no need to worry about a patient saying no if the doctor has moral and beneficial intentions for the use of a patient's private, biological
First, I believe that doing medical procedures without being given the consent to do so is a serious issue that is very wrong because that could be jeopardizing somebody's whole life without them even being aware of what is being done. “With Henrietta unconscious on the operating table in the center of the room, Dr. Lawrence sat between her legs. He peered inside her, dilated her cervix,
My initial response to the issues was only based on the hospital policies regarding the care of the patients within the hospital. However, when I was guided down the different paths and made to look through the different ethical lens, I found it tough to do so and seem to resort to my core values of autonomy and rationality. By putting the patients’ first, hospital policies, and then their loved ones in the first scenario, I determined that a compromise was necessary. Whereas in the second scenario, I feel as no agreement was needed just staff education (EthicsGame Simulation, 2016). In this particular case, Carlotta, the RN shift supervisor, needed further training to understand the hospital policy on who is or is not considered to be family (EthicsGame Simulation,
...ns. Patients should not be so medically ill that they are unable to make this decision. Patients should be fully conscious and understand the implications of their decision. Everything should be documented possibly even videotaped that way the doctor doesn’t lose their job, receive a lawsuit or worst jail!
I have come to fully understand that in order to treat my patients in a way that is person centred, I have to treat each person as an individual and realise that every individual has different needs and different rights and preferences to me which may go against my morals and beliefs but I always have to maintain my professional boundaries and treat each individual with respect and dignity. If I was a nurse who witnessed a similar situation to Kat’s, where another healthcare professional was disregarding my patient or any patients views or requests I would go into the patient’s room and find out what the problem was. Then I would politely ask the healthcare professional to step outside of the room and I would gently remind them of the code of ethics ((Kozier, Erb's & Berman, 2010, p.97) and the Registered Nurses standards of practise (2016), and how every individual has the right to make their own independent decisions about their healthcare needs/goals based on their own values, morals and beliefs. I would further explain that the patients are our main priority and it is our responsibility as nurses’ to ensure that the patients are safe and are receiving the proper care. I would then explain to the patient what was happening and apologise to them about the situation, and I would rearrange and try to negotiate with the patient when the procedure could be performed. Then I would notify the Nurse Unit Manager on the ward to ensure that situations like this do not occur
I personally feel that the life of a person is well above all policies and regulations and if an attempt to rescue him or her from death at the right time remains unfulfilled, it is not the failure of a doctor or nurse, it is the failure of the entire medical and health community.
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
Health Care workers are constantly faced with legal and ethical issues every day during the course of their work. It is important that the health care workers have a clear understanding of these legal and ethical issues that they will face (1). In the case study analysed key legal and ethical issues arise during the initial decision-making of the incident, when the second ambulance crew arrived, throughout the treatment and during the transfer of patient to the hospital. The ethical issues in this case can be described as what the paramedic believes is the right thing to do for the patient and the legal issues control what the law describes that the paramedic should do in this situation (2, 3). It is therefore important that paramedics also
The word “privacy” did not grow up with us throughout history, as it was already a cultural concept by our founding fathers. This term was later solidified in the nineteenth century, when the term “privacy” became a legal lexicon as Louis Brandeis (1890), former Supreme Court justice, wrote in a law review article, that, “privacy was the right to be let alone.” As previously mentioned in the introduction, the Supreme Court is the final authority on all issues between Privacy and Security. We started with the concept of our fore fathers that privacy was an agreed upon concept that became written into our legal vernacular. It is being proven that government access to individual information can intimidate the privacy that is at the very center of the association between the government and the population. The moral in...
Privacy is the condition where someone personal information can not be documented and be used by others (Parent, 1983). Privacy has been and continues to be a significant issue of concern for both current and prospective electronic commerce customers. The foll...