Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Relationship between technology and ethics
Applying medical ethical principles
Relationship between technology and ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Relationship between technology and ethics
Bioethics was originated many centuries ago. Ethical theories in medicine are the basis of bioethics. There are many different ethical approaches which causes much dispute. The imperical question is, what makes an act right and which approach to follow. The Greeks addressed the virtue of ethics. They looked into the good of the person and the situation. Ethos in Greek means, disposition and trait. So consequently they looked at eh person’s skills, habits, and traits. Compassion and the meaning of suffering are some other issues in Bioethics that can be argued. Choosing an act because it is right and also looking at the consequences are some other concerns. Other things to consider are what the patient and their families want. Their religious beliefs are also a major concern. How far should someone go to help a dying suffering patient who wants to take their life? Is it right to intercept and help a patient to die? Medical technology is ever advancing. People are being kept alive for years on support. This is a major topic of debate in Bioethics. Deciding if it’s right or wrong to keep them alive even if they are brain dead is a major concern. What constitutes a person a person when they have Alzheimer’s or brain damage? Are they a person? These are some of the major topics discussed in Bioethics.
To not cause harm to someone can take on many different meanings. It can constitute physical harm or mental harm. Physical harm would obviously mean that whoever is treating the patient to not cause actual physical harm for no reason. Mentally might mean not telling the patient the truth about their illness. Some believe that a little white lie is ok if it is not pertinent information to their medical c...
... middle of paper ...
...e in opinion will always be there, however; coming to an agreement for the sake of human nature is essential to everyone’s well being. Being Catholic I believe God has been taken out of the equation in too many institutions. If we followed the Lord’s word then we wouldn’t have such dilemmas. I know this is my opinion and realize that this is why there is so much debate. I am anti-abortion, but still believe in birth control. Again that is a debate other Catholics would argue on. Culture diversity is vast even within the same religion. This is the nature of human beings. Each and every person is unique and no two people think exactly alike. We will always have different aspects of Bioethics as long as there are people. We all must be engaged, for the bioethics we choose to follow will determine whether our society stands for human equality and human rights.
Nathaniel Wu, a talented and dedicated microbiologist, should be hired for the Intercontinental Pharmaceutical Company (ICP) under certain conditions. Wu, who was diagnosed with Huntington’s disease, was seen as the ideal candidate for the employment position the IPC was offering until this inconvenience was unveiled. To offer Wu employment unconditionally is extremely risky for the medical costs and equipment damages he can bring to the company can be devastating; to deny Wu employment entirely is a violation of bioethics and discrimination, for he was already offered the job position conditionally before taking medical tests. By offering Wu employment under certain conditions, Wu can be part of the IPC and have him employment terminated as soon as his condition begins interfering with his work quality.
They have very different perspectives and can determine various types of challenges in cases such like the Quinlan case. The ethical position that is most agreeable is utilitarianism. Deontological is the moral decision. Utilitarianism is the moral outcomes from a decision. The Quinlan case a tragic event of a 21year old woman in a coma and the debate of her end of life management. The deontological point of view sided with the hospital and utilitarian point of view sided with the family. From personal experience, I believe utilitarianism is the best the ethical principal for this case because it is focused on the relief of the family and Karen Quinlan. Ethics is basis of making moral decisions and outcome
The word abortion brings out a variety of attitudes & perceptions amongst people. The topic is surrounded by emotion and empathy, which often creates a divide, those who view abortion as permissible and those who do not. In “Bioethics Before Birth," Tooley and Marquis provide their arguments on abortion. Their arguments share some similarities but their viewpoints and delivery set them apart. I will evaluate and compare the differences and similarities in their arguments.
In the medical field, there has always been the question raised, “What is ethical?” There is a growing conflict between two important principles: autonomy and death being considered a medical treatment. Physician assisted suicide is defined as help from a medical professional,
The four major ethical principles in health care are: Autonomy – to honor the patient’s right to make their own decision (the opposite is paternalism - the health care provider knows best for the patient), Beneficence – to help the patient advance his/her own good, Nonmaleficence – to do no harm (many bioethical controversies involves this principle), and Justice – to be fair and treat like cases alike. All 4 principles are considered to be in effect at all times. In theory, each is of equal weight or importance. Ethical responsibilities in a given situation depend in part on the nature of the decision and in part on the roles everyone involved play.
Well, that is what I would think if I were a utilitarian bioethicist. This breed of bioethicists believes in "ethical distribution" of medical resources. They believe that medical resources are limited and certain standards should be created to determine who should receive treatment and who should not. Utilitarian bioethicists do not consider human life to be sacred; they argue that "some human lives are have greater moral and social value than others and that the authority to set these comparative values belongs rightfully to their elite group. They also believe in denying medical care to the elderly if their illness would impact the quality of their lives, even if patients believed their lives were still worth living or in fact enjoyable." (Koontz 354)
There is great debate in this country and worldwide over whether or not terminally ill patients who are experiencing great suffering should have the right to choose death. A deep divide amongst the American public exists on the issue. It is extremely important to reach an ethical decision on whether or not terminally ill patients have this right to choose death, since many may be needlessly suffering, if an ethical solution exists.
Physician-assisted suicide refers to the physician acting indirectly in the death of the patient -- providing the means for death. The ethics of PAS is a continually debated topic. The range of arguments in support and opposition of PAS are vast. Justice, compassion, the moral irrelevance of the difference between killing and letting die, individual liberty are many arguments for PAS. The distinction between killing and letting die, sanctity of life, "do no harm" principle of medicine, and the potential for abuse are some of the arguments in favor of making PAS illegal. However, self-determination, and ultimately respect for autonomy are relied on heavily as principle arguments in the PAS issue.
This issue of abortion also belongs to larger issues such as religious and ethical. People with the religious background have a set of values based on the Bible and believe that pro-life should be the only stand people take into consideration in order to protect human life and keep the baby alive. The other class is ethical. From this stand people can choose whether or not they believe abortion is the right thing to do and can make their own choice based on their values, regardless of what religion they are. Because abortion is such a widespread issue, it is crucial that we come up with an agreement on what is best and what steps are necessary in getting to that agreement.
In this diverse society we are confronted everyday with so many ethical choices in provision of healthcare for individuals. It becomes very difficult to find a guideline that would include a border perspective which might include individual’s beliefs and preference across the world. Due to these controversies, the four principles in biomedical ethic which includes autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice help us understand and explain which medical practices are ethical and acceptable. These principles are not only used to protect the rights of a patient but also the physician from being violated.
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.
Ethics refers to the values and customs of a community at a particular point in time. At present, the term ethics is guided by the moral principles that guide our everyday actions. These moral principles guide the researcher into deciding what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. The foundation of medical ethics is governed by two philosophical frameworks: deontology, and utilitarianism. However, ultimately, the ethics committees need to balance the risks, and benefits for the participants and the community associated with the particular research proposal.
Another huge ethical topic is the patient’s right to choose autonomy in the refusal of life-saving medicine or treatment. This issue affects a nurse’s standards of care and code of ethics. “The nurse owes the patient a duty of care and must act in accordance with this duty at all times, by respecting and supporting the patient’s right to accept or decline treatment” (Volinsky). In order for a patient to be able make these types of decisions they must first be deemed competent. While the choice of patient’s to refuse life-saving treatment may go against nursing ethical codes and beliefs to attempt and coerce them to get treatment is trespass and would conclude in legal action. “….then refusal of these interventions may be regarded as inappropriate, but in the case of a patient with capacity, the patient must have the ultimate authority to decide” (Volinsky). While my values of the worth of life and importance of action may be different than others, as a nurse I have to learn to set that aside and follow all codes of ethics whether I have a dilemma with them or not. Sometimes with ethics there is no right or wrong, but as a nurse we have to figure out where to draw the line in some cases.
The case of Dr. Lowell and Mrs. Jackson revolves around a conflict between the doctor, who advocates the implementation of a particular treatment and the patient who disagrees with the doctor and wishes to do things her own way. The doctor feels that the suggested course of action is disastrous and threatens to have the patient declared mentally incompetent. The question now is whether or not the doctor is morally justified in taking action against the patient in order to implement the course of treatment she feels would be most effective. Is this an infringement on the autonomy of the patient or is the doctor morally obliged to do everything that he/she can possible do in order to restore the patient’s health even if that includes to go so far as to take this decision out of the hands of the patient?
1. Ainslie, D. C. (2003). Principlism. In Encyclopedia of Bioethics, Vol. 5, 3rd edition, pp 2099-2104.