In life there would be times where a family member or yourself may become ill. It 's important to provide support and the proper care because it helps the healing processing of a patient; especially a child. A child needs the most care and support because children are innocent and most times do not understand what goes on around them. In the film “First, Do No Harm”, analyzing Dr. Abbasac I feel she was not acting in accordance with the Hipprocratic Oath I believe Dr. Abbasac did not act in agreement with tenets of The Hippocratic Oath. In the Hippocratic Oath it states clearly a doctor should service for the greater good of the patient. According to the Hippocratic Oath "I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according …show more content…
In the beginning of the film, Lori Reimuller learns that her son Robbie has epilepsy and she puts her full trust on the judgement of the Dr, Abbasac to treat his illness the bes ability. As Robbie 's health becomes worst and goes downhill and this caused her to become depressed, desperate for help and frustrated, her frustations lead her to read books in order to discover solutions to help Robbie 's illness. This movie is an statememt of those in the medical field who only recommend treatment options they prefer and favor. When Lori discovered Dr. Abbasac, she absolutely failed to follow the Hippocratic Oath. According to the Hippocratic Oath "I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly …show more content…
The information disclosures were not detailed enough and lacked empathy. A patient who 's a child dealing with epilepsy for the very first time, I believe the information that was provided by the doctors to Robbie 's parents should have been detailed enough for them to comprehend and react accordingly. Throughout the film movie when Dr. Abbasac spoke to Lori she really did not understand the medical key terms being said to her. She is not a doctor and Dr. Abbasac should have concerned the principle of her lacking experience in the medical field. Dr. Abbasac did not care to create a bond with Robbie or his family. She lacked the comforting and sympathy section stated in the patient’s bill of rights and oath. In which both are documents to provide the proper care for patients and I felt she disregarded it. Dr. Abbasac was very controlling over the whole situation regarding Robbie and his medical condition. She did not part take advice or
The doctor is a greedy dude who refused to work without payment just because of Kino's social class and race. To neglect any one of treatment is bad, but to deny a child treatment is cruel and should not be allowed whatsoever. He broke the Hippocratic oath because he wanted to go back to
Spike Lee was the director and producer of the 1989 movie “Do the right thing”. Do the right thing is a movie about a boy name Mookie (Spike Lee) that lives in a black and Puerto Rican neighborhood in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn with his sister name Jade. He works at Sal’s Famous Pizzeria, which is owned by an Italian-American owner who has owned it for 25 years, name Salvatore “Sal” Frangione. Sal has two son, Pino and Vito, and his oldest son known as Pino is a racist and detests the place likes a sickness” and holds many racial scorn for all the blacks in that community. Do the right thing is an ordinary film that pro different cultural meaning behind it and deals with mostly with racism between Blacks and other groups;
Grant successfully managed to treat Mr. G she comes to the realization that a doctor should not judge a patient no matter how they may act, as each patient may have a reason for acting the way they do. Dr. Grant has managed to learn how to combine her own personal experience with her doctoral skills she had learned in medical schools. Dr Grant believes. “ …[A]fter twenty-eight years of schooling, my education continues, both inside and outside the classroom” ( 183). Mr. G was the key figure in changing Dr. Grants judgement. If Mr. G had not shed light onto why he was in the hospital and how he felt stripped of his freedom to Dr. Grant she probably would have just branded him as crazy, she probably would have done the same to similar patients. As Dr. Grant states, “ … I was proud of myself for having accomplished my task… I was proud of myself because I had decided not to prejudge Mr. G” (182). Mr. G exposing his true emotions to Dr. Grant was the reason that she learned that she should not judge unique patients but instead, she should try to communicate with them and better understand so she can better help
For anyone who has ever worked in healthcare, or simply for someone who has watched a popular hit television show such as Grey’s Anatomy, General Hospital, House or ER know that there can be times when a doctor or health care provider is placed in extremely difficult situations. Often times, those situations are something that we watch from the sidelines and hope for the best in the patient’s interest. However, what happens when you place yourself inside the doctors, nurses, or any other of the medical provider’s shoes? What if you were placed in charge of a patient who had an ethically challenging situation? What you would you do then? That is precisely what Lisa Belkin accomplishes in her book “First Do No Harm”. Belkin takes the reader on
of Sal. It for the most part pawns him off as a racist. On the
The auteur theory is a view on filmmaking that consists of three equally important premises: technical competence, interior meaning, and personal signature of the director. Auteur is a French word for author. The auteur theory was developed by Andrew Sarris, a well-known American film critic. Technical competence of the Auteur deals with how the director films the movie in their own style. Personal signature includes recurring themes that are present within the director’s line of work with characteristics of style, which serve as a signature. The third and ultimate premise of the Auteur theory is the interior meaning which is basically the main theme behind the film.
In this context, new emphasis is being placed on the rights of patients. Recent federal legislation, for example, requires all health care facilities receiving Medicare or Medicaid monies to inform patients of their right to make medical treatment decisions. This includes the right to specify "advance directives," [1] which state what patients wish to be done in case they are no longer able to communicate adequately.
In the film, “Simple Justice” the ‘separate but equal’ of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) to the unanimous 1954 overturn of Plessy in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka without discussing the tortuous legal and political path that resulted in eventual public school desegregation. It caused a huge diversity among the schools, for whites and blacks but it wasn’t enough because people kept questioning about Plessy v. Ferguson, especially of Jim Crown laws regarding the changes they wanted to have. Therefore the film “Simple Justice” indicates the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that segregated schools were unconstitutional, and something necessary was needed to be done.
VI. All patients with insurance must sign the authorization for release of medical information form
In the United States of American a Patient’s Bill of Right was designed in order to guarantee each patients fair healthcare treatment. In additions to this it also protects patients and healthcare workers and allows patients to safely address any issues they are experiencing with the healthcare system. The Patient’s Bill of Right also helps patients establish a strong relationship with their healthcare providers. Establishing this strong relationship helps patients understand their role in the process
Hippocratic Oath was earliest code of ethics to govern conduct in medicine. Unlike many modern professional codes, its intent was to describe a moral vision for members of the medical community rather than to protect members of the community from incurring on the law. This oath and AMA medical ethics are similar as the primary goal of both codes of ethics is to give full benefit to the
The film used outside sources like journalists and politicians to give statistics. This appeal to logic doesn’t help me accredit them because they use opinions to state an argument instead of data. When these self-proclaimed ‘experts’ are less than qualified with their professional experiences, they can pretty much say anything that they want, and we will believe them because they’re professionals and we trust that they are experts, when they don’t have a clue. Therefore, I believe that these professionals pick and choose what they can and cannot speak about. It would help if they were honest and clearer about their experience. The consequence of not being clear about their qualifications and standpoints is that the public mostly cannot know who is speaking sense and who is speaking gibberish. With such a dilemma in the United States we need people who are trustworthy; professionals that have the clinical experience and people who show that they’ve done their research, people who are
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
However, ethically it was my role of responsibility or that of my registered nurse, to openly share medical knowledge and provide health care education for the betterment of the patient. This is an example of facilitating autonomy without crossing the boundary of making decisions for the patient, Choi, (2015). Moreover, within the scenario, I did support the patient’s self determination, by explaining to the patient that she could fill in the appropriate hospital permission form to read her chart with a doctor present, so medical diagnosis and medical terminology can be properly explained through the correct channels. Although the patient is a nurse by profession, it is outside of her scope of practice to be using her title as a nurse while she is a patient as she too must follow hospital protocols and ethical guidelines like any other