Introduction
Should health care professionals ever withhold the prognosis from dying patients? Disclosing too much information to the patient may be harmful. In new medicine patients have a right to information. The intentional withholding of information may be seen as an infringement of patient's rights (James, 2016). It is important to make a judgement regarding patient's need of information and also possible outcomes of treatment offered. Reasons of withholding information may stem from cultural, religious or personal needs. The question arises from truthfulness and honesty. Implying on what kind of information a patient may have an interest in knowing. The same is applied when the patient does not reveal all necessary information regarding
…show more content…
In the case of disclosure of a terminal disease, the physician is forced to make an all end-of-life choice. Due to belief and values of dying patient, a significant impact is faced with the quality of living and dying. Moreover, sensitivity and tact in the disclosure are of emphasis. In case the physician feels that the disclosure would have adverse effects on the patient he is justified to withhold the truth. Sometimes the families ask the doctor to withhold the information with a laudable motive of sparing their loved ones from the torture of hearing the unpleasant facts. The patient may as well advise the physician to withhold any truth from them, and the family consulted. However, this preference needs a critical thought out by the patient and should is respected.
Lying or withholding information on prognosis violates the doctor-patient fiduciary relationship (Adlan, & ten Have, 2012). It does not benefit patients and erodes trust when they realize the deception. Some courts recognize physicians justified lies if it was to save human life, in case the information may have adverse effects on the
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
The nurse should not inform the patient of her leukemia. The nurse has not been observing the patient long enough to use her assumption that the patient is mentally sound as a means to justify telling the patient stressful information. The nurse ought to follow the physicians instruction to refrain from giving the patient news about their chronic lymphocytic leukemia. This resolution follows with my own moral intuitions. If someone is not in a healthy mental state, it would not be morally permissible to provide information to that person which could cause their mental state to worsen. Although in most cases it is obligatory for a moral agent to always tell the whole truth in accordance with the prima facie principle of honesty, the principle of beneficence in moral situations similar to this one overrides the principle of honesty. One’s own health and well-being is more important than answering their questions to the fullest knowledge
The director started the documentary with an experience that led Dr. Gawade to question if he was dealing with his patient’s mortality in the best way possible. This brings up the main question; Is it better to talk about mortality early in treatment? The director and Dr.
However, it has been reported that telling a patient the truth may significantly improve their wellbeing as they approach the end of their life. One study revealed that truth telling may reduce terminal cancer patients’ uncertainty and anxiety, as indicated by lower scores on a Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale, and higher scores on a Spiritual Well-being scale (Kao et al. 2013). Furthermore, while there is no explicit principle regarding lying within the Hippocratic Oath, honesty is a virtue that is closely associated with physicians and health care providers. In fact, honesty can be closely related to respect for persons, which implies that it is necessary for the maintenance of the physician-patient relationship. Honesty about all relevant aspects of a patient’s diagnosis, prognosis and treatment are necessary to build trust, and to obtain informed consent.
When it comes to a bad diagnosis it is often difficult for doctors to tell their patients this devastating news. The doctor will likely hold back from telling the patient the whole truth about their health because they believe the patient will become depressed. However, Schwartz argues that telling the patient the whole truth about their illness will cause depression and anxiety, but rather telling the patient the whole truth will empower and motivate the patient to make the most of their days. Many doctors will often also prescribe or offer treatment that will likely not help their health, but the doctors do so to make patients feel as though their may be a solution to the problem as they are unaware to the limited number of days they may have left. In comparison, people who are aware there is no cure to their diagnosis and many choose to live their last days not in the hospital or pain free from medications without a treatment holding them back. They can choose to live their last days with their family and will have more time and awareness to handle a will. Schwartz argues the importance of telling patients the truth about their diagnosis and communicating the person’s likely amount of time left as it will affect how the patient chooses to live their limited
In my own personal story, I truly appreciated the doctor telling me that it would be painful. Also, in I Am Not a Patella, I felt as though the doctor was not honest by not telling the patient anything about her condition. According to Arnold and Boggs, “honesty is a basic building block in establishing trust. Studies show that clients…prefer complete disclosure” (pg. 205). The client is in an extremely vulnerable position. It is extremely important that the nurse or other health care provider be sensitive to this and ensure that trust is maintained. (College of Nurses of Ontario, 2013). Those who are terminally ill, appreciate those professional who are willing to talk to them honestly about dying and end of life preparations (Terminally Ill Deserve Honesty,
End-of-life care in the United States is often fraught with difficult decisions and borne with great expense. Americans are often uncomfortable discussing death and
In “How Doctors Die,” Dr. Ken Murray explains some different real stories about people having terminal diseases, and how their doctors and physicians treat them. Moreover, the author mentions about difficult decisions that not only the doctors but patients and the patients’ family also have to choose. When the patients’ diseases become critical, the doctors have to do whatever they can to help the patients, such as surgical treatment, chemotherapy, or radiation, but they cannot help the patients in some cases. In additions, doctors still die by critical diseases, too. Although they are doctors, they are just normal people and cannot resist all of the diseases. Like other patients, the doctors having critical diseases want to live instead of
In the magazine Newsweek, Mack Lipkin wrote an article titled “On Telling Patients the Truth.” In this piece, he summarizes his belief that medical information should be withheld from the patient because it is impossible to be completely truthful. This action is justified because patients won’t be able to understand the information, misinterpretation often occurs, and some people just don’t want to know the truth. I disagree with Lipkin’s thesis. I believe that physicians have a moral obligation to tell their patients relevant information about their disease, unless the patient clearly states that he/she does not want to hear it. Patients should be given this information because medicine is patient-centered, communication is necessary to build trust in a patient-doctor relationship, and withholding the truth seems to be more harmful to the patient in the long run.
Papadopoulos, O. (2010). Disclosing the truth to terminal cancer patients: a discussion of ethical and cultural issues. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 16(4), 442-447.
Within Melville’s “Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall Street,” the characters represent different meanings to the reflection of the author. Bartleby is introduced as an enigma to the narrator, and the confusing aura that he has presented to the audience poses symbolism in the way he acts. He is a symbol of physical and emotional isolation who only ever reveals information about himself when he isn’t compliant with the job he is tasked with doing. Although there were several imposing characteristics, Melville’s attitude towards Bartleby’s strange behavior, through irony, is empathetic and shows relatability through the curiosity of the narrator. The narrator is a lawyer who begins the story with three of his employees, comparing their
The writer discusses a situation of the doctor failing to disclose the nature of important medical condition which can jeopardize several of the patient’s family members and puts the doctor at odds with them. The problem is also discussed by Sutrop (2011) who show how protecting the patient’s confidentiality and self- decision capacity has actually caused severe hindrances to the field of scientific development and research.
Disclosure of pertinent medical facts and alternative course of treatment should not be overlooked by the physician in the decision making process. This is very important information impacting whether that patient will go along with the recommended treatment. The right to informed consent did not become a judicial issue ...
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.
The specific issue in questions is whether a nurse should keep the truth from their patient about their illness by respecting the wishes of the patient family or abiding by The Code of Ethics for Nurses and revealing the truth to the patient. The Code of Ethics for Nurses expresses the values and ethics of the nursing profession by stating that: Patients have the moral and legal right to determine what will be done with their own person; to be given accurate, complete, and understandable information in a manner that facilitates an informed judgment; to be assisted with weighing the benefits, burdens, and available options in their treatment, including the choice of no treatment; to accept, refuse, or terminate treatment without deceit, undue influence, pressure, intimidation, or penalty; and to be given necessary support throughout the decision-making and treatment process (The American Nurses Association, 2011). Unfortunately, truth telling to any type of patient is a common ethical dilemma: to tell the truth or to not tell the truth is the main question. Nurses have the closet relationship with patients and therefore are the ones put in a difficulty situation between their patient and the patient’s family. Who should they satisfy? Should they leave their patient in the