The Ethical Dilemma Of Lane V. Candura (1978)

An advanced practice nurse (APN), will be faced with different types of ethical-legal dilemmas that in most cases will require the APN to make urgent decisions that will include both moral and ethical attention. Ethical dilemmas are conditions that have to scenarios course of actions to take that will contradict each other (Westrick, 2014, pp 258-265). The APN will have to choose between the two urgent decisions because each of these choices is deemed to be equally right and urgent. This is the reason that makes dealing with ethical-dilemmas very stressful for the APN and other experienced caregivers involved. It is very noteworthy that an APN has many medical responsibilities to provide care, and are also in the position to make urgent medical decisions that is independent because of being the person in authority at that time. Many of the existing ethical dilemmas will fall in with a variety of treatment withdrawal vs maintenance, the quality of life vs the quantity of life, euthanasia vs non-euthanasia, and pro-choice vs pro-life (Westrick, 2014b, pp.77-83).

This paper will address the ethical dilemma of informed consent vs the right to refusal of treatment by the patient. I will show the

Her physician recommended that the leg be amputated but she failed to consent to that decision (Relman, 1978). This forced her daughter Lane to file a petition in court with an aim of being appointed as an authority on her mother’s behalf in order that she consents to the amputation procedure. It was established by the court that Candura was in a position to make her own decisions and so her leg was not to be amputated unless she agrees to it (Relman, 1978). In my case above, the patient is in a position to make his own decisions and is even supported by his son who happens to be his power of