. But it was Elsie’s right to refuse to get transfer to the hospital which can be supported by the Liberalism which lay stress on that civic life , public policy , and action of state should aim on promoting and respecting the autonomous life of each human being(Harris,2011). As per belief of liberalism , the concept of living a good life is different to every human being as a distinct autonomous being , and life the person values relies on their particular condition and features( Harris 2011). By saying this Elsie’s decision for not being resuscitated should have been respected by the health professionals as it breached her autonomy to make the decision regarding what’s right for her life and also regarding the concept of liberalism( …show more content…
In the scenario the decision made by the RN and the paramedics have breached the respect of autonomy of Elsie and failed to respect the decision made by Elsie. Megan-Janes 20.. implifies that people have the right and are to free to choose and act on their choices provided that their decision and act doesn’t impinge on moral interest of other people. Likewise Elsie’s choice to not to get advance treatment was of no harm to any other people rather than herself. In health settings Principle of Autonomy protests the patients right to be respected as dignified human being capable of making decision what is right for them even if everyone thinks that it is not right( ).In short health professionals must allow patient to participate in the decision making when it comes to their care and treatment. Furthermore (Harris 2011) have explained that it is very vital to respect patient’s autonomus decision to refuse intervention which is based on the principle of autonomy. Furthermore, in the scenario where the pressure of patient’s autonomy is in line, the argument depends on other moral principles( ).In this says Principle of non-maleficence gives justification. The Principle of non-maleficence says above all do no harm which means not to injure others or harm them ( ). Likewise , the RN and the Paramedics in the scenario had no intention of doing any harm to Elsie rather than saving her life. ( ) suggested that in nursing context the principle of non-maleficence would provide justification for performing any act which unfairly injures or makes a person to suffer which was avoidable. This will explain why the health professionals performed those acts despite the protest of Elsie which resulted in death of Elsie. Principle of Beneficence is another moral principle which defends against the principle of
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
Paramedics deemed the patient competent and therefore Ms. Walker had the right to refuse treatment, which held paramedics legally and ethically bound to her decisions. Although negligent actions were identified which may have resulted in a substandard patient treatment, paramedics acted with intent to better the patient despite unforeseen future factors. There is no set structure paramedics can follow in an ethical and legal standpoint thus paramedics must tailor them to every given
The ethical principle of non-maleficence 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 non-maleficence 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, the suffering of the patient and family would be evident. Autonomy is the right to make your own decisions and freedom to choose a plan of action.
This can be seen in the case study as ethical and legal arise in resuscitation settings, as every situation will have its differences it is essential that the paramedic has knowledge in the areas of health ethics and laws relating to providing health care. The laws can be interpreted differently and direction by state guidelines may be required. Paramedics face ethical decisions that they will be required to interpret themselves and act in a way that they believe is right. Obstacles arise such as families’ wishes for the patients’ outcome, communicating with the key stakeholders is imperative in making informed and good health practice decision. It could be argued that the paramedics in the case study acted in the best interest of the patient as there was no formal directive and they did not have enough information regarding the patients’ wishes in relation to the current situation. More consultation with the key stakeholders may have provided a better approach in reducing the stress and understanding of why the resuscitation was happening. Overall, ethically it could be argued that commencing resuscitation and terminating once appropriate information was available is the right thing to do for the
Barbara Huttman’s “A Crime of Compassion” has many warrants yet the thesis is not qualified. This is a story that explains the struggles of being a nurse and having to make split-second decisions, whether they are right or wrong. Barbara was a nurse who was taking care of a cancer patient named Mac. Mac had wasted away to a 60-pound skeleton (95). When he walked into the hospital, he was a macho police officer who believed he could single-handedly protect the whole city (95). His condition worsened every day until it got so bad that he had to be resuscitated two or three times a day. Barbara eventually gave into his wishes to be let go. Do you believe we should have the right to die?
In this essay I will be defending Judith Jarvis Thomson’s argument on `` A defence against Abortion``. In her argument she talks about how based on the situation a woman should be able to make a decision on her own whether she would want to keep the baby, or have an abortion, Thomson then stats that abortion should be legal, but only in some cases, she then stats her analogy. (Thomson, 1971, Page 48) “imagine this. You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the society of music lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist`s circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. The director of the hospital now tells you ``look, we`re sorry the Society of Music Lovers did this to you-we would never have permitted it if we had known. But stil...
Nurses everywhere face problems and challenges in practice. Most of the challenges occur due to a struggle with the use of ethical principles in patient care. Ethical principles are “basic and obvious moral truths that guide deliberation and action,” (Burkhardt, Nathaniel, 2014). Ethical principles that are used in nursing practice include autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, veracity, confidentiality, justice, and fidelity. These challenges not only affect them, but the quality of care they provide as well. According to the article, some of the most frequently occurring and most stressful ethical issues were protecting patient rights, autonomy and informed consent to treatment, staffing problems, advanced care planning, and surrogate decision making (Ulrich et. al, 2013). The ethical issue of inadequate staffing conflicts with the principle of non-maleficence.
This paper explores the legal, ethical and moral issues of three healthcare colleagues by applying the D-E-C-I-D-E model as a foundation of decision making as found in Thompson, Melia, and Boyd (2006). Issues explored will be those of the actions of registered nurse (RN) John, his fiancé and also registered nurse (RN) Jane and the Director of Nursing (DON) Ms Day. Specific areas for discussion include the five moral frameworks, autonomy, beneficence, Non – maleficence, justice and veracity in relation with each person involved as supported by Arnold and Boggs (2013) and McPherson (2011). An identification and review of the breached code of ethics and the breached code of conduct in reference with the Nursing, Council, and Federation (2008) will be addressed. Lastly a brief discussion on how the three schools of thought deontology, teleology and virtue had effects on each colleague (McPherson, 2011) .
In this essay the author will rationalize the relevance of professional, ethical and legal regulations in the practice of nursing. The author will discuss and analyze the chosen scenario and critically review the action taken in the expense of the patient and the care workers. In addition, the author will also evaluates the strength and limitations of the scenario in a broader issue with reasonable judgement supported by theories and principles of ethical and legal standards.
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
An ethical dilemma is defined as a mental state when the nurse has to make a choice between the options and choices that he or she has at her disposal. The choice is a crucial task as the opting of the step will subsequently determine the health status of the concerned patient, hence it requires a great deal of wisdom along with proper medical and health training before any such step is opted as it is a matter of life and death. Strong emphasis should therefore be on the acquisition of proper knowledge and skills so that nurses do posses the autonomy to interact with patients regarding ethical issues involved in health care affairs and address them efficiently. It is normally argued that nurses are not provided sufficient authority to consult and address their patients on a more communicative or interactive level as a result of which they are often trapped in predicaments where their treatments of action and their personal beliefs create a conflict with the health interests of the patient. (Timby, 2008)
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 ...
I believe the nurse was concerned about the facility rules and regulation more than the patient's suffering. She did not care about the dying 87-year-old lady that really needed her help. After all, the purpose of nursing is to help take care of patient at critical moments like this. I was actually shocked to see the nurse refuse to care for the suffocating patient. I do not think her reasoning has to do with respects patient autonomy at the moment.
The American Nurses Association Code of Ethics for Nurses has five elements that pertain to the Principle of Autonomy. Each individual element applies to “respect individual persons” (Baillie, McGeehan, Garrett T, M., Garrett R. M., 2013, p.33). In Chapter 2 of the Health Care ethics: Principles and problems text, it discusses thouroghly the consent of an individual to make their own decisions regarding their health and future requests of care. As a nurse or within all heath care professions, we must treat each individual patient with care, respect, and to remain mindful to the patient regarding any aspect of their lives. In the ANA Code of Ethics for Nurses, it explains ways of maintaining the empathy required in the health field. It further discusses that the respect for human dignity must be a priority, relationships to patients must remain neutral, the severity of the situation, the right to self-rule, and the professionalism that must be upheld by the nurse and their associates.
Another huge ethical topic is the patient’s right to choose autonomy in the refusal of life-saving medicine or treatment. This issue affects a nurse’s standards of care and code of ethics. “The nurse owes the patient a duty of care and must act in accordance with this duty at all times, by respecting and supporting the patient’s right to accept or decline treatment” (Volinsky). In order for a patient to be able make these types of decisions they must first be deemed competent. While the choice of patient’s to refuse life-saving treatment may go against nursing ethical codes and beliefs to attempt and coerce them to get treatment is trespass and would conclude in legal action. “….then refusal of these interventions may be regarded as inappropriate, but in the case of a patient with capacity, the patient must have the ultimate authority to decide” (Volinsky). While my values of the worth of life and importance of action may be different than others, as a nurse I have to learn to set that aside and follow all codes of ethics whether I have a dilemma with them or not. Sometimes with ethics there is no right or wrong, but as a nurse we have to figure out where to draw the line in some cases.