Moral decisions are not always easy decisions to make. However, necessary means are often provided to fulfill these difficult decisions. In health care, there are certain ethical principles or guidelines that help us make the appropriate choice when it comes to giving the best care to a patient, and they help justify the purpose for providing the best care to a patient. These principles are relevant in our health care system today in order for patient care to be as appropriate and as effective as possible. Each principle has a similar goal in mind which is to help the healthcare professionals make the appropriate choice for each patient; however, each patient has its own standard when it comes to these principles. Regardless of which …show more content…
Healthcare professionals should have a clear understanding from the beginning of their jobs to provide care that is catered to their patient’s needs and does no harm to their patient, yet some caretakers tend to walk the fine line between what is ethical and what is convenient. In Carolyn Buppert’s article, “Can I Prescribe for My Elderly Father?”, Buppert describes a situation involving nurse practitioners prescribing medications to family members for different reasons; nevertheless, this is a violation of the principle of justice because it is against the law to provide medications to family members without proper medical documentation (citation). Not only do ethical situations arise within the professional standpoint but also most workers who do not have day to day contact with patients do not realize that they must also provide care that follows the four principles. For instance, a chef that prepares the meals for the patients may not realize that the principle of nonmaleficence affects them, but if they were to prepare a meal that consists of nuts for a patient who has a known nut allergy, then they would be causing harm to the patient. Although the chef may not have been aware of the allergy, it is still could affect the treatment given to the patient if he or she has a reaction to the food. Although these incidences are where one principle can affect the lives of patients, there are also incidences where two principles do not integrate for the good of the patient. In cases such as Dax Cowart where he was in extreme pain, his one wish was to die; however, if he died in a way that could have been avoidable, then it would have been a violation of the principle of nonmaleficence, but if the patient wants to die, then it was support the principle of
These are examples of The Virtue Approach and The Rights Approach. In “Should I Protect a Patient
I believe that our patients have many basic rights that must always be provided, and must always be upheld. Our ethical duty as healthcare professionals ensure that we must give our patients these basic rights so we can provide the highest level of care possible. These basic rights include, privacy, respect, and also patients should be given the opportunity to give informed consent, among many other things. First and foremost, our patients must always be provided with a high level of privacy. Privacy allows our patients to feel comfortable coming to our healthcare facility and not have to worry about their confidential medical information getting released to anyone from the outside.
Ethics of healthcare depends on 4 moral standards and how they are utilised; autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice. Autonomy, which means self-governance, is the rule for regarding the privileges of a person to settle on a choice for them self, and respecting that decision. In healthcare this implies regarding a patient's choice on treatments, regardless of the possibility that it could bring about damage or demise to themselves. Autonomy is about self-rule, control free, without impact or influence from any other person, and is tied in with making an educated and un-forced choice about their care and medicines, based from their qualities and inclinations. Alongside autonomy is the principle of justice, which incorporates reasonableness
A moral dilemma that arises in a doctor-patient relationship is whether or not the doctor should always tell their patient the truth about their health. Although withholding information was a common practice in the past, in today’s world, patient autonomy is more important than paternalism. Many still are asking if it is ever morally permissible for a doctor to lie to a patient, though. David C. Thomasma writes that truth-telling is important as a right, a utility, and a kindness, but other values may be more important in certain instances. The truth is a right because respect for the person demands it.
The four principles of biomedical ethics serve as the foundation of decision-making for healthcare professionals. There has been significant debate over which principle is most important to consider for achieving the best health outcome for patients. In this paper, I will argue why no single principle is more important than the other. My primary argument is to demonstrate multiple instances where a different principle is most important, which would imply that no single principle is most importance across all possible cases. Furthermore, I will interpret outcomes as they relate to the improvement in a patient’s health or condition.
Since scientists found out the sequenced the human genome in 2003, a number of studies of genetics and genomics have greatly contributed to determining the multiple factors of how acute and chronic diseases develop and progress, such as cancer or cardiovascular disease. Cancer is no longer a single disease, which occurs combined with other different disease-causing factors. The sequencing of the human genome is a powerful tool to diagnose and treat disease in a medical environment. This rapid advance in genomes studies can help many people to prevent and to treat the gene-based diseases, and healthcare professionals also are urged to use this knowledge in practice. However, these advancements in genomics are accompanied by many legal, ethical,
Bioethics has four principles for which all healthcare professionals must abide by to be deemed practicing ethically. Each of the four principles go hand in hand with each other making it so one value should not be more important than another. This statement would go along with Beauchamp’s and Childress’ assertion that despite appearing first when recalling the major principles of bioethics, autonomy should not be taken to be the most important of the four (Beauchamp and Childress). However, autonomy may not be the most important, but neither are non-maleficence, beneficence or justice. Each of the four principles should be viewed as equals instead of being thought of as an ordered list of importance.
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.
Nurses are faced with ethical dilemmas related to clinical issues, and disease and treatment decisions daily (Kangasniemi,
The four core ethical principles that are called into question in the movie “Miss Evers’ Boys” are autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. Autonomy refers to the right of the patient to function independently and the ability to self-direct. This means that patients are entitled to decide what will happen to them, and if deemed competent, they have the right to either consent to or refuse treatment. All nurses and healthcare personal would be required to respect the patient’s wishes, even if they do not agree with them. Beneficence is the core principle that refers to the act of ‘doing good’ and advocating for the patient.
Ethical Complexity of Distribute Justice and Rationing Medicine is a practice based on moral standards applied to clinical values and judgments, also known as medical ethics. Ethical values consists of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy and justice. However, these ethical principles are affected when distributive justice and rationing of health care resources are implemented “…in a world in which need is boundless but resources are not…” (Scheunemann & White, 2011, p. 1630). The historic Hippocratic Oath described the four main principles of medical practice and established a moral conduct for clinicians. Beneficence demands that health care providers develop and maintain skills and knowledge, consider individual circumstances of all patients, and strive for the patient’s benefit.
As previously mentioned, health care professionals need to continue to improve the way the face ethical dilemmas. When a surgical doctor faces a moral situation where he faces when a patient refuses a blood emergency transfusion, he is guided by the broader ethic principles and laws dealing with beneficence (providing benefits and balancing them against risks to a patient of specific treatment), but at the same time he is guided by broader principal of non-maleficence (where a physician’s obligation of first, do no harm’ to a patient). When both of these principles conflict, then the patients right of autonomy be violated. This paper provides possible recommendations that prepare a medical professional to find the best solution that saves
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
The ethical theories and principles are implemented with patients, family members, peers, colleagues and health care providers in various clinical settings. More so, the nurses face moral stress involving two ethical principles that compete in the same situation. An example is the respect of patient autonomy and provision of health care that is in the best interest of the patient. The moral decision of the nurses leads to moral distress if the nurse is unable to implement the decision due to the institutional constraints, limited patient care resources, financial issues, family disagreements in health care interventions appropriate for the patient, and health care providers-imposed limitations (Guido,2014).
The first principle, states that the nurse’s obligation is to the patient alone and no one else, because of this the physician’s opinion does not matter. The patient has rights and in this scenario Matt’s family does not want to order a DNR and since Matt did not leave one, Matt needs to be saved as it is assumed that Matt, would want to be saved. Matt’s family members are representing his opinion as they are the closest to him (Creasia & Parker, B. 2001). The nurse has a personal problem with the patient because he is a drug abuse patient.