Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Professional ethics and values
Professional ethics and values
Ethical dilemmas and responsibilities
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Healthcare providers must make their treatment decisions based on many determining factors, one of which is insurance reimbursement. Providers always consider whether or not the organization will be paid by the patients and/or insurance companies when providing care. Another important factor which affects the healthcare provider’s ability to provide the appropriate care is whether or not the patient has been truthful, if they have had access to health, and are willing to take the necessary steps to maintain their health.
Once a physician-patient treatment relationship exists, the physician must provide all necessary treatment to the patient, the physician is liable for care and the intentional refusal of care is Abandonment. Patient abandonment is defined as the unilateral withdrawal by a physician from a patient's care without first formally transferring that care to another qualified physician who is acceptable to the patient. Abandonment is not only ethically problematic but also a defining act of unprofessional conduct (Crausman, 2004). Patients must also always have access to services in emergency circumstances.
Providers must act in the best interest of the patient and their basic obligation is to do no harm and work for the public’s wellbeing. A physician shall always keep in mind the obligation of preserving human life. Providers must communicate full, accurate and unbiased information so patients can make informed decisions about their health care. As a result of their recommendations, providers are responsible for generating costs in health care but do not generate the need for those expenses. Every hospital has both an ethical as well as a legal responsibility to provide care, even if the care may be uncompensated.
Patients are ultimately responsible for their own health and wellbeing and should be held responsible for the consequences of their decisions and actions. All people have the right to refuse treatment even where refusal may result in harm to themselves or in their own death and providers are legally bound to respect their decision. If patients cannot decide for themselves, but have previously decided to refuse treatment while still competent, their decision is legally binding. Where a patient's views are not known, the doctor has a responsibility to make a decision, but should consult other healthcare professionals and people close to the patient.
It is important that people are in control of what happens to them while under the care of their doctor, especially if they're alert and aware. A provider cannot force treatment; if a patient is unconscious, the situation changes because competency and informed consent are not present.
A patient with sufficient choice making limit has the moral and legitimate right to decline medicinal consideration. This refusal can be communicated by the patient, the substitute, or through a development
The ethical and legal issues raised in this case are related to autonomy and beneficence. In health care, autonomy is the right of a competent patient to make informed decisions about the type of health care they would like to receive. This principle is founded on the concept of obtaining consent from the patient before administering any medication or medical procedure. Autonomy provides that a patient who has no mental incapacity has the right to decide whether to agree to medical treatment. This right is not restricted to what others consider as sensible provided the patient has the capacity to make the decisions.
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
In a way, the patient can fully understand, and then allow the patient to make an educated decision. Issues related to informed consent include the patient not understanding, some patients are not mentally capable of giving consent, or the patient is incapacitated and has not made their wishes know previously. To combat this, doctors have patients sign consent forms stating they fully understand their options, and risks before treatment. When entering a facility, the patient is asked if they have a living will. If they don’t they are asked if they would like to make one. Dictating how they would like to be treated if they need life-support. In some cases, patients never make a living will, and have gotten to a point where the facility is merely keeping them alive, because that is their mission statement. In cases like this, an advocate from the courts may be assigned to the patient. To decide on the best choice of action. In others, the judge makes the final decision (Pratt, 2016, p. 354-362). Basically, if the patient has made their wishes know in writing or by appointing someone to act on their behalf the facility must follow their wishes. If the facility can not the patient can be moved to a facility that can. If the patient never made their wishes know the facility must keep them alive until someone in their family or the courts decide. Regardless as to what
This paper intent to answer difficult ethical questions related to patient autonomy and right for self-determination. What happens when patient health decision goes against public opinion? Nurses trained to follow a principle of beneficence and non-maleficence when providing care. They also taught to respect patient right for self-determination and his free will in making medical decision. Which ethical principle takes priority when providing care for patients and where do we draw a line between harm and respect for individual decisions.
She has the formal power but in this situation she can not used it. What is important to know is that in any complicated situation, there is an answer, a way to escape. The nurse is in the position to take a decision and she must first assess her alternatives of action. First of all, the nurse knows that a patient has the right to refuse medical care and treatment and to leave the hospital against medical advice (AMA). In our case, Mrs. Jackson is aware of her serious problems and of the fact that leaving AMA the insurance will not pay for her hospitalization. Also, her doctor tried to prevent her from leaving AMA, explaining to her that at home she will have problems in managing her pain. Even so, Mrs. Jackson wants to leave, and the nurse must to respect her wish. In making the decision, the nurse may also consider the fact that the doctor left the prescriptions and follow-up appointment papers. In my opinion, the nurse should treat Mrs. Jackson the same way she treats the patients who are discharged with the doctor’s “blessing”. She must let Mrs. Jackson go home with her rider and give to her the prescriptions and follow-up appointment paper. Mrs. Jackson knows that she has left only few more weeks and in my opinion she deserve to spend these days in the way she will consider that is making her
Are decision making of doctors really beneficial for patients? Often patients give up all autonomy for the doctor’s perceived great knowledge of the health services. But as in all humans self-interest almost always clouds one decision on what is best. Terence Ackerman claims noninterference is bad because it does not consider effects of illness of a patient (Degrazia, Mappes, and Ballard 70-140) . Meaning that noninterference in regards to autonomy; makes the doctors job and decision very simple, “let the patient decide.” This is often a tragic case because most patients do not understand the consequences or benefits of a health decision or procedure. Thus why Edmund Pellegrino argues the central paradox in medicine is the tension between self-interest altruism, which means unselfishness (Degrazia, Mappes, and Ballard 70-140). Lying to patients for self-interest is an injustice on all levels and I will prove why.
The Doctor and Patient relationship aspect of Medicine has changed drastically in the last twenty years. It has evolved from paternalism (the doctor makes the decision for the patient) to shared decision making where the patient is considered an equal partner in his/her own health related decisions. Informed consent is the cornerstone for this view. When a patient or a research subject makes an autonomous decision after understanding, the risks and benefits involved with the decision is Informed consent. Complete Informed consent covers the following components: competency, disclosure, comprehension and voluntary. Competency refers to the requirement for the individual to be of legal age and be mentally competent to understand the process. Disclosure relates to knowledge of the relevant risks and comprehension means fully understanding the pertinent and factual risks before consent. Voluntary is when the decision is without coercion or duress. (Colston, 2004)
The best way to provide patient care is education, this means educating the patient, family members, and anyone making medical decisions on behave of the patient. Each medical staff member should be open and honest about the procedures within their scope of practice. The more education the family gets the better the medical judgment will be for the patient. Within the medical education the healthcare professionals must be non-judgmental about the decisions the patient or power of attorney make. The patient as well as their family must be treated fairly, with dignity, self respect, with the practice of maintaining as much patient independence as possible.
I believe the patients have the right to refused treatment for any reason. Caring for the patients includes respecting the patients wishes. A patient can ethically refuse treatment for the purpose of saving money, not having the money for treatment, emotional, physical adverse effects, and for religious reasons, even if the treatment would benefit the patient. It is the patient who would be affected by the decision. For example, if the patient followed the doctor’s advice to have chemotherapy, the patient would agree to endure extreme amount of pain and inherent a huge hospital bill only to live a year or so. The patient has the right to die with dignity and save the money for his or her love ones. Part of the
I do not believe that if a patient is about to die, and that patient makes a request to withhold treatment, that the doctor should withhold it. To me that is going to make the patient suffer even more than he already is, so I believe that the doctor should continue giving the patient their treatment, or ask if they would like to have their life terminated with a lethal injection. infection. The snare I also believe that the patient's immediate family should have a say in what happens. Let's say that the patient has been in a coma for several months, and the only thing that is.
These tax-payer funds would likely be much better utilized providing more effective, low cost care to more individuals than high cost, low effective care to one individual. However, as the provider follows medical ethics and their obligation is to the patient, this occurs quite frequently in our current system. This can happen in the treatment of cancers with low success rates, or other expensive treatments involved in prolonging life for individuals with terminal illnesses. Ultimately, future restrictions in resources and funding may require more difficult decisions based on the good of the many over the good of the individual.
In the health care industry, patients’ have a legal right when making decisions pertaining to their health and medical needs. Did you know, it is the responsibility of medical professionals to promote responsible business practices at every level of the organization and the business should be conducted ethically and honestly? Ethics are the values and moral principles that govern and guide the decisions and actions of a group or an individual. Ethics give direction on how to act right from wrong when faced with moral issues and dilemmas. In addition, there are three ways ethics are used within the health care aspect;
If they voluntarily opt out of the practise, though they are protected by conventions and international laws, this act of theirs would be looked upon as a professional misconduct. Medical ethics give paramount importance to the autonomy of a conscious and sound patient.
Also it might be the patients decision for nothing to be done, in this case the