Autonomy and Beneficence: Supporting Ms. R's Home Decision

In this paper I am going to justify that the interdisciplinary team should support Ms. R’s decision to live at home alone using the ethical principles of autonomy and beneficence.

Autonomy is defined as “the right to make independent decisions concerning one’s own life and well being” which encompasses four main meanings describing autonomy as: “free action, effective deliberation, authenticity and moral reflection” (Yeo & Moorhouse, 1996, p.91-93). In the case of 59 year old Ms. R, who has stage IV metastatic lung cancer (Kirk, 2014), respecting her autonomy can be honored using three of the four autonomy principles; free action, effective deliberation and authenticity. Using autonomy as free action, defined as “being able to do what one wishes

Using autonomy as effective deliberation which relates autonomy as having “to do with the rationality of a person’s thought process” (Yeo & Moorhouse, 1996, p. 94), it could be confirmed using the results of the capacity assessments as evidence, that Ms. R is rational and making this decision with competent deliberation. Mr R’s decision can additionally be justified using autonomy as authenticity, which assesses the consistency of a person 's choice with their “settled dispositions, values and characters” (Yeo & Moorhouse, 1996, p. 94). Since Ms. R is a 59 year old woman who has been living alone, her choice to remain home is authentic and no different than what she has been doing

al., 2010, p. 103-104). In medicine, beneficence is the foundation of every encounter a clinician has with their patient, they are there to help alleviate symptoms and diseases in order to do good for them. In the case of Ms. R, respecting her decision to live alone will violate this premise of beneficence and go against all the medical advice she has been given. However, like with all decisions in medicine, a patient is presented with options and if the patient is mentally capable of making their own healthcare decisions, their decision should be respected no matter what it is. Nonetheless, just because Ms. R made a decision to live alone and accepts her potential risks, doesn’t mean that her daughter along with the medical team should let her put herself in harm 's way. There are other means of beneficence and nonmaleficence in this case that can be achieved while still respecting Ms. R’s autonomy. Firstly, Ms. R’s daughter can move in with her and be by her side everyday, or if she cannot move in, she can come visit her mom on the days the home health aid is not scheduled, that way someone will be always there to monitor her. Additionally, due to Ms. R’s increased risk of falling along with her other medical risks, the social working can help arrange for Ms. R to receive a