Terrence Ackerman, “Why Doctors Should Intervene,” Hastings Center Report, vol. 12, no. 4 (Aug 1982): 14-17 1) Since when does the American Medical Association officially include respect for autonomy as a principle of medical ethics? 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 …show more content…
(Ackerman 17)” However, this framework does have its limitations. The legal model does not recognize “the impact of illness upon autonomous behavior, it impair the ability of patients to engage in contractual therapeutic relationships.(Ackerman 17)” Sarah Cullen and Margaret Klein, “Respect for Patients, Physicians, and the Truth,” in L. Vaughn, Bioethics: 148-55 Prima facie (149): (Latin) at first sight, before you consider an argument or view more deeply. 1) What is the view criticized by the authors? Cullen and Klein understand that deception is wrong and disrespectful to the patient but criticize that some cases are more complicated and not so black and white. They argue that physicians should be able to withhold information that can significantly benefit the patient. The key part is that the benefit is greater than what the deception causes. 2) Identify the sentences that express the thesis the authors will defend. “Cullen and Flein Concede that in rare cases, it is permissible for doctors to deceive a patient but only if the deception is for a short while and if the potential gain from the deception is probable and significant. (Cullen Klein
Not all cases is patient autonomy the most important thing to respect and honor. There will always be situations where Medical paternalism is justified. Justifiable paternalism in a medical perspective is prolonging patients’ lives allowing them to exercise their autonomy. Failing to respect a patient’s treatment requests or denials is a violation of the autonomy at that point in time during their illness. 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
Truth in medicine is a big discussion among many medical professionals about how doctors handle the truth. Truth to a patient can be presented in many ways and different doctors have different ways of handling it. Many often believe that patient’s being fully aware of their health; such as a bad diagnosis, could lead to depression compared to not knowing the diagnosis. In today’s society doctor’s are expected to deliver patient’s the whole truth in order for patients to actively make their own health decisions. Shelly K. Schwartz discusses the truth in her essay, Is It Ever Ok to Lie to Patients?. Schwartz argument is that patients should be told the truth about their health and presented and addressed in a way most comfortable to the patient.
One of the most complex, ever-changing careers is the medical field. Physicians are not only faced with medical challenges, but also with ethical ones. In “Respect for Patients, Physicians, and the Truth”, by Susan Cullen and Margaret Klein, they discuss to great extent the complicated dilemmas physicians encounter during their practice. In their publication, Cullen and Klein discuss the pros and cons of disclosing the medical diagnosis (identifying the nature or cause of the disease), and the prognosis (the end result after treating the condition). But this subject is not easily regulated nor are there guidelines to follow. One example that clearly illustrates the ambiguity of the subject is when a patient is diagnosed with a serious, life-threatening
Based on them, we can definitely eliminate options (c) and (d). Option (c) is against the principle of veracity and informed consent because the doctor was lying and hiding the information about the patient’s health that the patient was supposed to know. Option (d) is morally incorrect because the patient is lied to and the surgeon is not penalized. Option (b) does abide by the principle of veracity, but is against rationality because it sets negative example for the community that the doctors can be forgiven for their mistakes. Moreover, it does not abide by stewardship because the surgeon is taking advantage of being a doctor to conceal the truth. Consequently, the morally correct decision would be the option (a) because it abides by the principles of veracity and informed consent as the responsibility of disclosing the truth to the patient is fulfilled. Moreover, considering the rationality and stewardship, it will set an example for all the doctors that incomplete disclosure of information to the patient is unacceptable and the doctors should not take advantage of their importance in the
Denise Dudzinski, PhD, MTS, Helene Starks, PhD, MPH, Nicole White, MD, MA (2009) ETHICS IN MEDICINE. Retrieved from: http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/pad.html
Siegler, M., and W. Winslade. "Ethics in Medicine." Clinical Ethics. By A. R. Jonsen. 7th ed. N.p.:
From the utilitarian’s side, lying might be a good choice, since it brings more happiness to the patient. In fact, truthfulness can actually do harm. Patient’s health situation becomes worst when he knows that he have a serious disease. He will become depressed and might suffer from psychological disorders like anxiety which reduces the efficiency of healing. For example people suffering from Nosophobia , Hypochondriasis or Nosocomephobia: “which are an irrational fear of contracting a disease, a fear of hospitals or refers to excessive preoccupancy or worry about having a serious illness ” are most likely to be affected by truth of having a serious ill or undergoing a dangerous medical operation. That’s why some doctors use lying as way of curing; they don’t try only to heal the disease, but also they make sure that the patient is in his most relaxed state, in order not to harm him. Roger Higgs in his article “On telling patients the truth” argues that doctors have no exemption from telling the truth. I other words, when a doctor lies he needs to give justifications. For the maleficence argument, Higgs argues that the truth actually does not harm; but the way the doctor tells the truth a...
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
Steinbock, Bonnie, Alex J. London, and John D. Arras. "The Principles Approach." Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine. Contemporary Readings in Bioethics. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013. 36-37. Print.
Tarzian, A. J., & Force, A. C. C. U. T. (2013). Health care ethics consultation: An update on core competencies and emerging standards from the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities’ Core Competencies Update Task Force. The American Journal of Bioethics, 13(2),
Jecker, N. (1990). Integrating medical ethics with normative theory: Patient advocacy and social responsibility. 11(2), 125-139.
Although doctors believe that they should tell lies because truthfulness is impossible because patients cannot understand them; in fact, there is no need for not telling the truth. First of all, doctors say that patients do not understand them (Bok 227): because their diagnosis includes esoteric information and in general patients are unfamiliar with this information, so they cannot understand their doctors (M.Smith and M.Weil 21).However, this argument is not enough for lying because doctors can make good explanations for patients, and they can simplify their esoteric information. Second of all, doctors say that it is impossible because while patients are weakened by illness and...
McGee, Glenn and Arthur L. Caplan. "Medical Ethics." Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997: Microsoft Corporation. CD-ROM.
Consequently, it can be assumed that doctors might tend to avoid such a confession in order to maintain their image of being a “good doctor” (J.Shahidi). Not being a good doctor may eventually lead to doctor’s loss of business and as a result physicians may tend to hide the truth even if it opposes patient autonomy
The American Medical Association (AMA) developed a Code of Medical Ethics which includes: the patient has a right to obtain and discuss health information related to benefits, risks, and costs of treatment alternatives; patient’s can make decisions pertaining to healthcare suggested by the physician; the patient has the right to courtesy, respect, dignity, and attention to healthcare needs in a timely manner; and the patient has a right to confidentially, continuity, and adequate health care. (emedicinehealth, 2011). Communicating openly and honestly between the patient and doctor will allow both parties to make decisions to properly take care of needs.