Kuhse's Dilemma Case

1585 Words7 Pages
According to the oncologist, Nurse L. was acting immorally and unprofessional when informing her patient Michael Q. of all his treatment options including chemotherapy, and alternative treatments such as natural therapies. I strongly disagree that the nurse was acting immoral because it was the patient’s medical and legal right to know all of his options, not just the ones that may be most successful, or ones that medical professional determines as the best options. That being said, I do not believe the patient’s physician should have the final decision about their treatment, unless the patient is unable to make a final decision for himself and has no family to assist him. Because the oncologist did not tell his patient about all the treatment options, Michael Q. was not was not fully informed and therefore his agreement to receive the chemotherapy treatment was not informed consent.
Although I can understand why the oncologist may consider the nurse was acting unprofessionally by Kuhse’s standards, I do not agree with the oncologist’s decision or actions. According to Kuhse, nurses should only have a position of “advocacy for patients” and should accept their apparently subservient role in the medical world. Her ideas state that truly caring
…show more content…
and Michael Q., I strongly believe that Nurse L. was not acting immorally or unprofessionally. I agree with Immanuel Kant’s summarization, “All lies, including those told out of altruistic motives, are wrong.” Michael’s oncologist withheld crucial medical information and alternative treatment options. Had Michael not known about at all his options, his circumstances could have turned out extremely different. Unless Michael had the inability to make his own rational decisions or there was no one to assist him in making the decisions for him where he could not, there were no reasons for the oncologist to withhold information and make the final decision that treatment was the best option for
Open Document