Every hospital has to follow the laws and respect patients’ privacy any rights. Even though the medical staff encourages the patient and the family to go along with the appropriate treatment in order to cure the illness, but it’s still their choice to accept or refuse it. This paper addresses that informed consent is different for every culture, and strategies on how a medical professional can balance cultural preferences with full disclosure. Furthermore, why adolescents shall be allowed to make their own life and death decisions and address the dilemmas on informed consent, also ethics versus legal issues.
Informed Consent
The informed consent should be different for different cultures. A culture of an individual is their way of life. Within
…show more content…
Examining Six Medical Ethics Dilemmas (2008) magazine states that, “Doctors are men and women of science: assess the symptoms, order the tests, make a diagnosis, and administer the treatment…teams work with patients and families to help understand a prognosis, navigate treatment options, and act as mediators in oftentimes highly stressful life-and-death situation.” The sick person has the right to accept or refuse treatment after getting sufficient information. One ethical dilemma was brought to the attention of the hospital staff that consisted of a drunk man who hit his head on the bar and was rushed to the hospital. The doctors declared him brain dead since he had severe inner bleeding occur within his brain. Next, the patients’ girlfriend came to the hospital, and she asked for a testicular biopsy in order to retrieve his sperm before he deceased, so she could conceive his baby. Within this situation, the doctors had to decide whether to grant the patients girlfriend request or not. Dr. Rhodes made a stunning statement, this woman needs to set forth any evidence about the patients’ plan of posthumous reproduction. Another physician mentioned that the request could have been granted if she was the patient’s wife. Dr. Berlinger thought that the girlfriend was trying to inherit part of the patients’ estate by producing his heir. Then the outcome came to the patients’ family who were open to the idea of continuing their sons’ legacy. Also, the physician suggested to the parents that another way of giving new life was through organ denotation instead of harvesting the sperm. The girlfriend and the parents came to the final decision of denoting the patients’ organ and they were transplanted into four people. This was an example of an ethical dilemma that occurred within the health care facility. Five guidelines are
However, she along with her entire family had absolutely no knowledge of the use of her cells. This sparks the ethical controversy that surrounds the medical field, when and how should human
In some cultures, family members make treatment decisions on behalf of their loved-ones. Provided the patient consents to this arrangement and is assured that any questions about his/her medical care will be answered, the physician may seek consent from a family member in lieu of the patient.”
At times, doctors have to choose between the preservation and honor of a patient's dignity or to break ethical guidelines to help the human races’ health. A doctor who puts his patients’ well-being as his priority, usually respects the patient’s wishes. However, many factors influence a person’s decision to conduct an unethical experiment. In the contemporary biography, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Rebecca Skloot shows that scientists constantly discover and develop new concepts and procedures that help heal numerous people, despite the unethical experiments that they conduct on living organisms.
“Consent, an issue for the Patient” In 1951, Henrietta Lacks’ cells were taken without her knowledge and to this day are still being used , she never got any type of recognition for that either both financially and publicly . Giving permission to doctors to do what they want with your body is a big debate today . Some people believe that there is no need for doctors to ask , and others think if somebody has something the world needs there is no such thing as permission . These people also believe that your body should be at the full disposal of the doctors . If it is your body you should be the only person in charge of what happens to it .
However, the process is certainly not perfect. Many patients do not fully understand what exactly it is they’re signing. Nonetheless, physicians must explain to patients to the best of their abilities. Informed consent is a vital process. Although most people are willing to help with research that will positively contribute to the future of medicine, a majority would be appalled to discover
Medicine has changed in ways over the years that one might have never thought twice about having anything like that happen to them. People today have increased their knowledge overall about their health situations and how to treat themselves. Patients are stepping up and making decisions about their healthcare choices each day with physicians. And in this process it has turned out to be so important for people to understand what is truly being done before medical treatment is given. We have talked this semester about informed consent and how important it is that our patients understand the meaning of what they are having done.
For instance, the practitioners are obligated to constantly inform the participants about plans that pertains to interventions (Reamer, 1987). In addition, it is essential for informed consent to include the following: “What is done, the reasons for doing it, clients must be capable of providing consent, they must have the right to refuse or withdraw consent, and their decisions must be based on adequate information” (Kirk & Wakefield, 1997, p. 275). One of the most dehumanizing incidents that occur is the researchers prohibit the participants’ self-determination. For example, the men were compliant with receiving treatment and to be examined by the physicians.
After reading this case I was terribly shocked about the fact that something like this could happen in our medical history. I couldn’t believe how a patient could be neglected so much. Based on the material that we have learned the lack of ethical theory of deontology in Dr. Evan was disturbing. As a doctor Dr. Evan’s role is to care for patients, keep them away from harm and prolong their life. Though in the trial he stated as if he didn’t care.
The doctors failed to use a properly consenting patient, neglected Charlie’s emotional state, and failed to conduct proper research. If Charlie had a caretaker who could give consent on his behalf, similar to a minor, an operation of this sort could be ethical. Moreover, it could be ethical if the doctors’ research and further develop their theory before using a human test subject, and pay close attention to Charlie’s emotional and mental health. However, Charlie’s operation was performed without these precautions and guidelines, and he suffers greatly in the
The ethical principle of autonomy provides for respect for the patient’s autonomy to make decisions and choices concerning their life and death. Respecting the patient’s autonomy goes against the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. There also exists the issue of religious beliefs the patient, family, or the caretaker holds, with which the caretaker has to grapple. The caretaker thus faces issues of fidelity to patient welfare by not abandoning the patient or their family, compassionate provision of pain relief methods, and the moral precept to neither hasten death nor prolong life.
Atul Gawande in his article “Whose body is it, anyway?” introduced couple of cases, which discussed a controversial topic, doctors dealing with patients and making important medical decisions. These are difficult decisions in which people might have life or death choices. Who should make the important decisions, patients or doctors? Patients don’t usually know what is better for their health and while making their decisions, they might ignore or don’t know the possible side effects and consequences of these decisions.
An essential part of modern society relied on trust, especially the trust of doctors and scientists. People had the right to make an informed decision about their bodies and body parts. People had a right to their body parts, both attached and cell samples collected by doctors. The actions that the medical professions made will continue to affect future generations in both positive and negative ways. In the contemporary biographical novel, the Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Rebecca Skloot used logical opinions to argue about the importance of consent to reveal the lack of morality from those in the medical field which continues to persist today.
Consent is patients’ rights because they have right to know what is happening to their life which is fundamental value in professional practice (Department of Health (DH), 2001). Dougherty and Lister (2015) state that consent is a patient’s rights to refuse or to accept a treatment. However, Dimond (2010) said that consent is a voluntarily decision which can be given orally, verbally, written or implied for example if you ask a patient to take their blood pressure and they offer their arm. Eyal (2012) also states that consent promote trust in medical procedures that people may seek and comply with medical advice and participate in medical research. Bok (2013) argues that there are problems with the trust-promoting as many patients give consent despite being to some extent distrustful.
The practice of health care includes many scenarios that have to do with making adequate decisions when it comes to a patient’s life, and the way they are treated. Having an ethical code in all health care organizations is very important, because it helps health care workers with reaching a suited and ethical decision when it comes to the patient. In health care, patient will always be put first, and their autonomy will always be respected. Nevertheless, when there is a situation where a patient might be in harm, or might be making their condition worse because of the decisions they made. Health care workers will always be there to
There can be no right or wrong answering this. There is a policy known as the Dead donor rule that raises a lot of ethical questions. Medical professionals must weight the value of saving a life with the individual rights with their body. However, with this rule the person must be declared dead before a doctor can harvest the organs. My debates lie in when is dead dead.