Main Facts: Jahi McMath is a 13 year old girl that is brain dead. She went into coma on December 9th, 2013 at the Children’s Hospital in Oakland, California following complications from a tonsillectomy. She went into cardiac arrest and suffered a brain hemorrhage. New York doctors urge hope for brain dead Jahi McMath by Joel Landau.
Applications of Ethical Principles: Autonomy allows patients to refuse medical treatment (Aiken, 2009, p. 125). In this case the patient is a minor child and the mother has the right to refuse to take her off life support. Beneficence means the healthcare professionals should always try to help the patients and to make the situation better (Aiken, 2009, p. 126). The doctors are not making the situation better
…show more content…
Bernard Lo’s decision making process is gathering the information (McTeigue & Lee, 2015, p. 29). The patient’s mental status is she is unconscious due to being brain dead. Her comorbidities were cardiac arrest, hemorrhaging of the brain and sleep apnea due to a tonsillectomy. The view of Dr. Phil Defina stated “Why do we want to jump ahead and pull the plug on this 13 year old girl who may have a chance to recover?” (Landau, 2013) The one thing that complicates this case is the mother wanting to keep her daughter on life support and have her transferred to another state. The second in the decision making process involves an ethical issue of end of life (McTeigue & Lee, 2015, p. 29). The principals involved in this patients care would be autonomy, beneficence, nonmalefiance, justice and integrity. The ramifications of choosing to keep this girl on life support would be causing more harm to her. Take for example, she could develop thrombus, pneumonia, decubitus ulcers and even muscle atrophy due to the fact that she is not mobile. The third step in the decision making process is identifying the dilemma (McTeigue & Lee, 2015, p. 29). In this case the patient is minor who is unconscious and she is clearly not able to make any decisions. The real dilemma here is what should this mom do she is receiving a lot of conflicting information between doctors. There are no other
There is no doubt that beneficence is an important principle that paramedics are taught to follow with every patient. In the Nola Walker case, beneficence was achieved to an extent. They performed two vital signs assessments, seven minutes apart, and assessed the laceration which was caused by her seatbelt. Walker was persistent in her refusal to be taken to hospital or any treatment. We know that the average clinical approach is much larger than what was executed, especially with a trauma victim. While the beneficence principle has not been fully implemented, the paramedics operated at the best of their ability at the time, and in a result of potentially lacking in benefitting the patients needs, they respected her aspirations to not be transported or treated. Autonomy is to have the right over your own being, so when Walker stated she doesn't need to be transported or treated is her right and the paramedics deemed her to be competent and informed enough to make that decision. Due to her refusal, the standard of beneficence was fulfilled to the length of their
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
Beauchamp and Childress (2012) defined autonomy as self-ruled, self governance or self determination. John Peter Smith hospital did not respect the advance wishes of Mrs. Munoz. Although Marlise did not have a formal advance directive Mr. Munoz, her surrogate, continued to advocate her wishes . Mrs. Munoz right to autonomy
In conclusion, we support the Court’s conclusion to uphold the doctor’s decision not to resuscitate Charlotte Wyatt on the grounds that she was no longer truly living and her prolonged existence and suffering did not outweigh the sum of the costs to both herself and everyone involved. Although ownership, or responsibility for a minor usually falls upon the parents or guardians, under these conditions they were unable to make an unbiased decision due to emotional investment.
The ethical principle of nonmaleficence demands to first do no harm and in this case protect the patient from harm since she cannot protect. Nurses must be aware in situations such as this, that they are expected to advocate for patients in a right and reasonable way. The dilemma with nonmaleficence is that Mrs. Boswell has no chance of recovery because of her increasing debilitating mental incapability and the obvious harm that outweighs the intended benefits. If the decision were to continue treatment, suffering of the patient and family would be evident. Autonomy is the right to making own decisions and freedom to choose a plan of action. When making decisions regarding treatment of another person, it is important to respect the expressed wishes of the individual. John says that his mother would want to live as long as she could, but questions arise related to her quality of life and perception of prolonged suffering by prolonging the dying process. In BOOK states that quality of life changes throughout one’s life ...
Jahi McMath is a 13-year-old girl living in Oakland, CA who was declared brain dead by multiple neurologists more than three months ago. Jahi was declared brain-dead December 12th after barriers during surgery a few days earlier to remove her tonsils, adenoids, and uvula at Children's Hospital & Research Center Oakland. At least three neurologists confirmed that Jahi was unable to breathe on her own, had no blood flow to her brain, and had no sign of electrical activity in her brain. Moreover, a court order kept Jahi's body on a ventilator while independent experts could be brought in to confirm the results (Wells, 2014). Even so, the McMath family was able to secure the release of Jahi's body through the county coroner, who issued a death certificate, and have been keeping her on a ventilator at an undisclosed facility ever since. This all occurred after Children’s Hospital released Jahi due to her severe brain damage along with the probability of the hospital receiving profit from discharging Jahi before her or her family were ready for her to be released (Johnson and Rhodes, 2010, p. 61).
In an effort to provide the standard of care for such a patient the treating physicians placed Ms. Quinlan on mechanical ventilation preserving her basic life function. Ms. Quinlan’s condition persisted in a vegetative state for an extended period of time creating the ethical dilemma of quality of life, the right to choose, the right to privacy, and the end of life decision. The Quilan family believed they had their daughter’s best interests and her own personal wishes with regard to end of life treatment. The case became complicated with regard to Karen’s long-term care from the perspective of the attending physicians, the medical community, the legal community local/state/federal case law and the catholic hospital tenants. The attending physicians believed their obligation was to preserve life but feared legal action both criminal and malpractice if they instituted end of life procedures. There was prior case law to provide guidance for legal resolution of this case. The catholic hospital in New Jersey, St. Clare’s, and Vatican stated this was going down a slippery slope to legalization of euthanasia. The case continued for 11 years and 2 months with gaining national attention. The resolution was obtained following Karen’s father being granted guardianship and ultimately made decisions on Karen’s behalf regarding future medical
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.
family chooses to take their loved one off of life support. A PVS patient has no
Charlotte’s parents thought otherwise, the Ethics Advisory Committee had to get involved. The debate surrounded if the doctors were in the right to control the life of someone who were incapable of deciding themselves, or is it the parents right. The Ethics Advisory Committee, stated that the parents were superior to those of the hospital and the hospital should conduct with less painful test. Charlotte’s parents wanted the doctors to continue testing until it was determined that her life diffidently had no chance of remaining. Because, of Charlotte’s parents’ desires unfortunately caused Charlotte to die a painful death without her parents. If the patient is unable to speak for their selves, the family should be able to have some say in the medical treatment, however; if the doctors have tried everything they could do, the hospital should have final decisions whether or not the patient dies or treatment
The principle of autonomy states, that an individual’s decision must be respected in all cases, also an individual can act freely in accordance to their plan. For example, in a case where a patient and family demands to continue medical or surgical care and a physician want the patient to stop further treatment. In this case the patient’s choice will matter the most. According to the principle of autonomy it will be the patients and family choice whether to continue or discontinue treatment. The principle of beneficence which states, “one must promote good” comes into play in this case. In accordance to beneficence the patient will not benefit from the physicians responses personally. He/she will not benefit from harming her body with more surgeries. The patient will be going against the principle non-maleficence, which states that “one must cause no harm to an individual” by causing harm to herself. In this case the physician is justified in his/her actions by discontinuing medical or surgical care to the patient because it will not it her. These principles are what healthcare provider use to help and guide patients with the ...
The aim of the analysis is meant to clarify the meaning of the word autonomy thereby the introduction of a concept. Clarification is needed as the word autonomy does have several meanings and not all apply to medical terminology, some meanings span to philosophy, technology and general decision making. The medical meaning is significant in the care of patients for improved outcomes through choice and educated decision making on the part of the patient. Autonomy can be empowering as a concept or even as a single word.
Autonomy is identified as another professional value and one that the nurse must possess. Autonomy is the right to self-determination. Nurse’s respect the patient’s right to make a decision regarding their healthcare. Practical application includes, educating patients and their families on their choices, honoring their right to make their own decision and stay in control of their health, developing care plans in collaboration with the patient (Taylor, C. Lillis, C. LeMone, P. Lynn, P,
The doctor then incorrectly informed her team that they did want their child to be resuscitated. The doctor witnessed that the child indeed had a heartbeat and was even crying, so they took the child and incubated her. Due to this decision the child, Sidney Miller suffered a brain hemorrhage and is now mentally and physically impaired. Even though the parents told the doctor that there was no use in resuscitating because her life will be in danger, she still took it upon herself and saved the child anyway. They took the case to court and sued them for battery and negligence for treating the infant without consent.
This current policy should be kept in place ultimately to prevent patient anguish when recovery is not likely. In this case, patient suffering trumps the right to autonomy due to the fact that the patient on life support cannot express their level of comfort; therefore, it is safer to prevent potential suffering when recovery is not