Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on informed consent
Essays on informed consent
The doctrine of informed consent
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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.
One crucial point that Lipkin fails to recognize is that medicine is patient-centered. Even though medicine has changed via technological advances, healthcare coverage, and ethics, one thing has remained constant – medicine provides care for the patient. More than that, medicine (especially primary care) emphasizes treating the patient as a person, not a diagnosis. In the story Being Mickey’s Doctor, the pediatrician who treats ten-year-old Mickey learns valuable lessons about being humanistic and compassionate. Mickey was a talkative child who would let Dr. Morhimann (the pediatrician) know the good and bad things about her treatment. She would complain when the doctors had conversations right outside her door, and didn’t like when Dr. Morhimann talked to Mickey’s siblings about the disease in a way that made it seem like the disease had replaced Mickey. The main point...
... middle of paper ...
...sis, not the doctor.
In conclusion, doctors have a moral obligation to tell patients the truth about their illnesses, unless the patient clearly states that he or she does not want to know. Medicine is a field that works to treat the patient. This means that physicians are there for guidance, using expertise and years of education to guide them to a cure. This does not mean that a physician should make decisions about the patients without proper consent. Believing that patients will misunderstand the diagnosis, or assuming that they won’t want to know are not valid reasons for keeping information from the person. Communication is important in a medical setting, and is especially important when talking about the health of an individual. With relevant, appropriate and humanistic communication, telling a patient their diagnosis can and should be done in a caring way.
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.
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
A basic definition of confidentiality is that information about a patient is not discussed openly (Edge and Groves, 2007). This ethical principle became an issue when the government gave medical facilities lists of people who were in the study. Again, the patients were not informed that they would not be able to
In “Should Doctors Tell the Truth?” Joseph Collins argues for paternalistic deception, declaring that it is permissible for physicians to deceive their patients when it is in their best interests. Collins considers his argument from a “pragmatic” standpoint, rather than a moral one, and uses his experience with the sick to justify paternalistic deception. Collins argues that in his years of practicing, he has encountered four types of patients who want to know the truth: those that want to know so they know how much time they have left, those who do not want to know and may suffer if told the truth, those who are incapable of hearing the truth, and those who do not have a serious diagnosis (605). Collins follows with the assertion that the more serious the condition is, the less likely the patient is to seek information about their health (606).
Disclosure is an essential aspect of a medical professional and his or her patients’ relationships. In the 1950s, the medical client and professional relationship was one of paternalism as opposed to the now fiduciary relationship. Then a paternalistic professional took all of the responsibilities, disclosed what he then thought was necessary, and essentially told the patien...
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.
Should doctors tell the truth to their patients? How much information should the patient know about a certain ill or operation? These controversial questions are asked more frequently in our society. Patients nowadays,. are very sensitive to certain diseases more than before. This paper argues against telling the truth in doctor-patient relationship. Not by defending the idea directly but, by presenting first how truth can be harmful to the patient and by giving Higgs’ objection to it, then by giving my own objection to Higgs’ argument.
Effective communication between patient and clinician is an important aspect to patient care. Proper communication has a direct positive impact on patient care and adversely poor communication has a direct negative impact on patient care. I will define the seven principles of patient-clinician communication and how I apply these communications with my patients. I will also describe the three methods currently being used to improve interdisciplinary communication and the one method that my area of practice currently uses. Then, I will explain the ethical principles that can be applied to issues in patient-clinician communication. And Lastly, the importance of ethics in communication and how patient safety is influenced by good or bad team communication.
One day while doing his job, a physician used a used swab that was possibly infected with HIV on another patient. When looked at by certain people, the doctor did the correct thing by telling his patient that he roused a swab on him/her. However, the chances of this patient getting HIV was substantially low, and he should have waited for the patient to develop symptoms, which would have been rare, before telling the truth. As stated by Michael Greenberg, “he might have done better by keeping his mouth shut.” If the doctor did lie, he could have lied to protect himself, the quality of life of the patient, and his ability to help others with their lives. If he had not told the patient that he used the swab on him/her, he/she would not have had to live in fear of getting HIV. Because of this decision of truth telling, the doctor lost his job, money, confidence, and also affected someone’s quality of life.
... correctly used by doctors instead of the ways how lies are commonly told in modern day medical practice. Overall, today’s physicians should not assume what they believe is best for their patients and should be truthful in relaying news about medical conditions, even though the diagnoses may be grave. Though the situation may look bleak, what doctors should do is take up the responsibility to be honest with their patients in order to honor the principle of respect for autonomy, and yet be beneficent by presenting a sense of realistic hope that treatment will succeed so that patients will not easily give up on their chance of living. Instead of putting one bioethical principle over the other, as seen with benevolent deception, a balance should be made in most circumstances so that a patient can receive the honest health care information he or she rightfully deserves.
The most common areas of clinical practice where truth-telling and deception become an ethical dilemma are critical care, cancer and palliative care, mental health and general nursing practice (Tuckett, 2004). Other areas where it can raise potential ethical concerns are in placebo therapy, disclosure of human immunodeficiency virus and informed consent (Tuckett, 2004). Truth-telling is also an act of exchanging moral agents (patients, relatives, nurses) with their sets of values and norms, which in turn are derived from culture, personal and religious beliefs, and traditions (Dossa, 2010). For this reason, the issue of truth-telling is not only approached differently in the various clinical settings but also in different countries, cultures and religions (Kazdaglis et al., 2010). For example, in the United States of America (USA), England, Canada and Finland, the majority of patients are told of their diagnosis (Kazdaglis et al., 2010). Conversely, in Japan, family members play a major role in the decision of ...
Patient confidentiality is one of the foundations of the medical practice. Patients arrive at hospitals seeking treatment believing that all personal information will remain between themselves and the medical staff. In order to assure patients privacy, confidentiality policies were established. However, a confidentiality policy may be broken only in the case the medical staff believes that the patient is a danger to themselves or to others in society. Thesis Statement: The ethics underlying patient confidentiality is periodically questioned in our society due to circumstances that abruptly occur, leaving health professionals to decide between right and wrong.
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 ...
Physicians with this outlook base these decisions on a utilitarian perspective, in which the outcome is the deciding factor. Physicians with a utilitarian outlook may disregard a minor’s confidentiality because they may believe it is ethically justified to disclose health information to the parents of a minor whose health is in danger. Although a doctor’s duty involves patient’s autonomy and the prolonging of a patient’s life, their duty of confidentiality may change when family or partners are involved (Gilbar 2004). This is a utilitarian approach since the physicians would be considering the lives of others and maximizing the greatest good for the greatest amount of people.
Patients rely on their physicians and other doctors, patients think or do what the doctor was right. Family doctor broke the minor patient confidentiality, without their permission. Minor patient 's family secret is broken, the patient can choose to stay away treatment.addition medical patient told the doctor, it seems disgusting and disclose sensitive personal information, do not tell their parents, then the doctor should not be counted. Patient doctors in private life and we will not collect information on the condition they use. When a child with your doctor about these issues doctors should not do, when the time the child is in danger, it is to tell the child 's family. Doctors suspect family problems, children at risk, the authorities may be notified. Sometimes they show that abortion is the best for her, and notify the parents may be dangerous. The right to disclose information under the background to avoid disclosure or "special relationship" obtained. "Special relations, including between doctors and patients, lawyers and clients, priest and penitent or confiders, guardians and their communities" ( "Doctor patient confidentiality"). Communication between patient and doctor is very important, usually including a doctor and other professionals work. Sometimes you need counseling and medical advice and family relationship breakdown when a minor patient 's medical crisis. Once the doctor has a duty of confidentiality, they