Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on medical ethics
Essays about ethics in healthcare
Ethics in patient care
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An essay on medical ethics
Case 2A
When it comes to deciding whether to keep fighting for a love ones life or accept the reality and give up inadequate medical treatment this can place many of us in tough situations. The problem in this situation is that it is not easy to make a decision for this type of scenario. When it comes down to seeing a person suffering or making them confortable until they pass away. I believe that if there is no cure for a person’s condition and the only option is focusing on their comfort until they die, the person should have the right to die peacefully. In the book we learned about beneficence, this is define as, we should perform actions that are done to benefit the person. However, in this situation by performing aggressive measurements
…show more content…
I would hold the surgeon responsible for her actions. Prior to any surgery the surgical team has the responsibility to do a time-out before any surgical procedure. A time out consist in the following steps: asking the patient to state their full name and date of birth, ask them what type of procedure they are undergoing and if they know the location of their surgery. By performing a time-out this gives the surgeons the opportunity to catch any mistakes and prevent errors from occurring. Not only does a time out prevent surgical error, but it also verifies that the patient has fully understand the informed consent that they sign prior to the surgical procedure. As a member of the AC I will suspend the surgeon because this will teach other members of the hospital the importance of policies that must be follow in order to prevent mistakes. In regards to the family and when it comes to being ethical the family has the right to know about the incident because as healthcare professionals we must keep in mind that veracity is part of our principle of human dignity. We must be honest and truthful even if this means that there might be consequences such as a lawsuit. We will also explain to the family that we have follow hospital polices and the person in charged of the mistake has been taken care
While working at the OB-GYN department in the hospital, Dr. Vandall, as a Vice Chair of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, learned that another employee of the hospital, Dr. Margaret Nordell was engaged in a level of treatment that was unethical and violated accepted standards of care. It was his duty to the hospital and to the patients, to monitor the competence of his staff members. Although he tried to take the proper steps to deal with it within the hospital, he ended up reporting this to the North Dakota Board of Medical Examiners. It was concluded by the Board that the treatment of Dr. Nordell was gross negligence and they suspended her license to practice medicine.
The employee that was responsible for checking the code cart and making sure that all items were there should be held somewhat accountable for the death of Dixon. Her death was not a result of a surgical error, incorrect diagnosis or a terminal diagnosis; it was due to a lack of oxygen. It is unfortunate that it had occurred however, I agree that Dr. Taylor was not negligent in this case. The hospital failed to train the employees properly on the importance of checking code carts after they have been used to make sure that whatever was used is
Healthcare creates unique dilemmas that must consider the common good of every patient. Medical professionals, on a frequent basis, face situations that require complicated, and at times, difficult decision-making. The medical matters they decide on are often sensitive and critical in regards to patient needs and care. In the Case of Marguerite M and the Angiogram, the medical team in both cases were faced with the critical question of which patient gets the necessary medical care when resources are limited. In like manner, when one patient receives the appropriate care at the expense of another, medical professionals face the possibility of liability and litigation. These medical circumstances place a burden on the healthcare professionals to think and act in the best interest of the patient while still considering the ethical and legal issues they may confront as a result of their choices and actions. Medical ethics and law are always evolving as rapid advances in all areas of healthcare take place.
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 ...
They were part of the healthcare team and went along with the beliefs of their team. The team should have directly included the patient and parents. I cannot help but wonder if this legal battle would never have taken place had an ethics committee been assigned to this case. Ethics committees provide structure and guidelines for potential problems, serve as an open forum for discussion, and function as a true patient advocate by placing the patient at the core of the committee discussions (Guido,
Even though Barbara’s intentions in this paper are directly stated, her claims she gives does not back her argument at all. After reading her major claim, which states that we do not have the right to die (97), I feel the complete opposite of what she thinks and I believe a person should have the right to die if there is no chance of them getting better in the future. The author’s grounds explained all of the struggles of keeping a very sick man alive, which I believe gave me some very good evidence to write my counter argument.
Terminally ill patients no longer wish to have their lives artificially prolonged by expensive, painful, or debilitating treatments and would rather die quietly. The patients do not wish to prolong their life and they may not wish to commit suicide themselves or worse, are physically incapable of doing so. People have the right to their own destiny and living in the U.S we have acquired freedom. The patients Right to Self Determination Act gives the patient the power to decide how, when and why they choose to die. In "Editorial Exchange: Death with Dignity: Reopen Assisted-Suicide Debate." The Canadian Press Sep 27 2013 ProQuest. 7 June 2015” Doctor Donald Low and his terminally ill friends plea to physician assisted suicide in an online video. He states that it is their rights as cancer patients to make the decision to pass, but he is denied. Where is the equality? Patients who are on dialysis or hooked up to respirators have the choice to end their lives by ending treatment. However, patients who are not dependent on life support cannot choose when they can pass. Many patients feel that because of their illness that life is not worth living for and that life has already been taken from them due to lack of activities they can perform. Most of the terminally ill patients are bedridden with outrageous amounts of medication and they don’t want family members having to care for them
There are several important ethical issues related to euthanasia. One is allowing people who are terminally ill and suffering the right to choose death. Should these people continue to suffer even though they really are ba...
A divergent set of issues and opinions involving medical care for the very seriously ill patient have dogged the bioethics community for decades. While sophisticated medical technology has allowed people to live longer, it has also caused protracted death, most often to the severe detriment of individuals and their families. Ira Byock, director of palliative medicine at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, believes too many Americans are “dying badly.” In discussing this issue, he stated, “Families cannot imagine there could be anything worse than their loved one dying, but in fact, there are things worse.” “It’s having someone you love…suffering, dying connected to machines” (CBS News, 2014). In the not distant past, the knowledge, skills, and technology were simply not available to cure, much less prolong the deaths of gravely ill people. In addition to the ethical and moral dilemmas this presents, the costs of intensive treatment often do not realize appreciable benefits. However, cost alone should not determine when care becomes “futile” as this veers medicine into an even more dangerous ethical quagmire. While preserving life with the best possible care is always good medicine, the suffering and protracted deaths caused from the continued use of futile measures benefits no one. For this reason, the determination of futility should be a joint decision between the physician, the patient, and his or her surrogate.
My initial response to the issues was only based on the hospital policies regarding the care of the patients within the hospital. However, when I was guided down the different paths and made to look through the different ethical lens, I found it tough to do so and seem to resort to my core values of autonomy and rationality. By putting the patients’ first, hospital policies, and then their loved ones in the first scenario, I determined that a compromise was necessary. Whereas in the second scenario, I feel as no agreement was needed just staff education (EthicsGame Simulation, 2016). In this particular case, Carlotta, the RN shift supervisor, needed further training to understand the hospital policy on who is or is not considered to be family (EthicsGame Simulation,
There is great debate in this country and worldwide over whether or not terminally ill patients who are experiencing great suffering should have the right to choose death. A deep divide amongst the American public exists on the issue. It is extremely important to reach an ethical decision on whether or not terminally ill patients have this right to choose death, since many may be needlessly suffering, if an ethical solution exists.
After this incident I spoke to my team leader and we both agreed I needed to report this situation to higher management. I documented the occurrence under the Incident Report file and filled out an online incident report for the doctor due to his unacceptable behavior, unsafe practices and professional misconduct. Within one week, our department’s management contacted me, the team leader, and the resident doctor that was involved. They spoke to all of us about how to avoid scenarios like this in the future, they recommended that we look at each other’s role on the health care team as equal not above or below one another, and that we share power and control in our patient’s plan of care. They also reiterated that if any order or intervention is unclear that it is better to seek clarification rather than have any errors occur. At the end of this whole experience, we evaluated the scenario as a group and planned to work together as a
The surgeon came in and they ended up taking her back to surgery immediately but this incident happened over the course of three hours. I manually held pressure on her groin to try to stop the bleeding with the intensive care nurses at the bedside to help if I needed. Eventually, after the two-hour mark, things started to slow down and I ended up getting pulled from the room to take a phone call. It was my supervisor asking me to take another patient onto my team of five that I already had and was not even able to check on during this incident. Needless to say, I told her no and she ended up sending the patient anyways. Thankfully one of the other nurses got the patient settled and as a team, they all took care of this new patient despite having five others of their own. This is a very good example of how dangerous it is to be short staffed. Acting in the spheres of influence is one way to try and prevent future problems like this one from ever happening again. Unfortunately, short staffing is a constant problem for nurses everywhere and doing the best we can do takes a toll on our health. Great job on your post and thanks
Euthanasia is one of the most complicated issues in the medical field due to the debate of whether or not it is morally right. Today, the lives of many patients can be saved with the latest discoveries in medicine and technology. But we are still unable to find cures to all illnesses, and patients have to go through extremely painful treatments only to live a little bit longer. These patients struggle with physical and psychological pain. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. discusses the topic of just and unjust laws in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” which brings into question whether it is just to kill a patient who is suffering or unjust to take that person’s life even if that person is suffering. In my opinion people should have the right, with certain restrictions, to end their lives in the way they see fit if they are suffering from endless pain.
In my opinion in today’s world we hear so much about “what quality of life does the patient have and how will it increase or decrease?” If someone has an incurable disease and is in pain and clearly suffering why shouldn’t they have the right to choose how long they suffer? In many readings that I have done it was said multiple times that if we have the right to live than why shouldn’t we have the right to die? And also along with that it said will giving people that right justify people committing suicide? I think we should have the right to choose death over living if the circumstances call for it such as a terminal illness with no chance of recovery and little to no quality of life.