After all, autonomy means that the patient is in charge of their own life and can make decisions for themselves. However, this argument did end up changing my viewpoint to an extent. By supporting his argument with the concept of a person’s wellbeing, the author causes me to believe that in some cases disregarding a patient’s wishes may be better for them. He does this by including the subjective and objective theories of wellbeing.
Dr. Raison demonstrates how a patient should never raise their expectations, so they would not disappointed in the end. However, one should never contain too little hope, “Thus, positive and negative thinking must always bring about positive and negative physical results in the real world” (Raison). Dr. Raison has second hand experience with the situation of limiting hope because he experiences it through his patients. For the most part, limiting one’s hope can be beneficial because it does not cause one think too much or too less of the situation. At times, expectations can be difficult to reach.
A doctor may have to operate even in the absence of consent, to save the life of the patient. It is possible that even with such an intervention, the patient may not survive. Assuming that the doctor is competent and has exercised due care and diligence, the doctor cannot be held responsible for a patient's death, as the doctor has acted in good faith and in the best interest of the patient. Maintaining a good Doctor patient relationship often works better than the best informed consent!
However, the responsible and trusted caregiver team must take an action through multiple processes in order to favor the patient. Although the physicians have known earlier when the terminally ill patient near to die, they are not comfortable with withdrawing of life-sustaining treatments. The intention is not to kill the patient, but using the available technology and creating a moral obligation to use what ethical principle prescribes. Underlining the disease process cannot be reversed, life-sustaining treatment can be withdrawn acknowledging that the treatment limitation (Reynolds, Coper, & McKneally, 2005). Ethics committee is a helpful source of advice that can provide consultation about ethical issues in treatment limitation.
I think this policy falls short of its goals and objective, which is to protect the patient. The ultimate goal is for the patient to receive safe, quality, affordable care. To ensure effective and efficient care Congress, CMS and all stakeholders involved will need to review, address and revise the issues and concerns surrounding this policy to prevent undue harm to the
If we as nurses respect the confidentiality of a patient, we should do so for all the patients. However, Griffith (2007) argues that the duty of confidence should not be absolute and nurses should always consider sharing information if required. Though the principle of respecting patient autonomy and their right to confidentiality is broken here, the principle of beneficence and non-maleficence is uphold. Nurses have an obligation to protect patient’s confidentiality but the duty to warn an innocent party of imminent harm is far more critical. Therefore, breaking confidentiality here is potentially doing more good than
Healthcare providers should always remind themselves that their patient’s and family member’s point of view is more important than their own (Burns, Bradley, & Weiner, 2011, p. 171). A healthcare provider’s communication decisions could have a positive or negative affect on their credibility and that should not be taken
Often the use of restraints has an opposite effect of the intended purpose, which is to protect the patient. The risk of using a restraint must be weighed against not using the restraint and the right decision should occur. Uses of restraints should be documented, be on a time limit, and be frequently re-evaluated. Basic education of professional staff who orders restraints is another missing element in position to statements and recommendations. Successful removal was grounded in staff education, commitment of staff, residents and families, and in alternative equipment (Wang, W., 2004).
Safety is a condition characterized by minimal risk of harm coupled with protection from potential harm. In health care, patient safety involves instituting mitigation measures to prevent potential adverse events. Unfortunately, the existence of potential adverse events is only recognized after such an event has occurred. Reporting an adverse event, therefore, is the first step towards developing mitigation measures. However, some nurses fear reporting adverse events, because they erroneously believe they will be penalized for the occurrence of such an event.
Malpractice is negligence, offense, or breach of duty by a professional individual that causes a patient to be injured. Much of the time, it includes when a nurse did not meet a standard of care or to deliver care that he or she should deliver in a similar situation. According to Standards of Practices “Standard 2: Responsibility and Accountability”, the nurses have to maintain, practice, respect and promote patient’s autonomy, as well as to provide care in a responsible and accountable manner. However, keeping the truth from a patient will not enable them to come to terms with their condition and give them the alternative for further treatment. Hence, it would be better to tell the patient the truth to guarantee that the nurse will not face any lawful issues unless the patient has a lack of decision-making capacity which could be caused by mental illnesses, such as dementia or being
Basically for the principle of non-maleficence means to be the direct cause of harm done to a patient, so not just to promote the well-being of the patient or to prevent harm to them, but to not be the direct cause of the harm. Ethics committee is a group of healthcare professionals that must developed guidelines and
Health care workers are called upon to improve and maintain the health of our patients. A society where the civil rights of patients are dependent on the religious beliefs of others is not one I would want to live in. Basic rights and equality should never yield to discrimination, especially when people’s lives depend on the services of health care professionals. Even though the refusal to treat patients is legally protected by the RFRA, we should try to minimize discrimination, prevent our self-interests from providing exceptional care, and if not possible then there should be alternative ways to offer our patients the services they need. In the end, when we chose to pursue a profession in health care, we chose to benefit all of
There are three implications that would occur if a change in law were past, one would be the change in palliative care. Adequate palliative care is a prerequisite to the legalization of medical aid in dying. Patients should never have to choose death because of unbearable pain, which can be treated but cannot be accessed. It is wrong to deny grievously ill patients the option of medical aid in dying because of systematic inadequacies in the delivery of palliative care. Safeguarding patients by building a strong patient physician relationship must be established so that there is no foul play in the outcome.
The mental capacity of the patient should be considered in this case. The patient is under a huge amount of stress and pain which will most likely affect his mental capacity. Pain and trauma is can change a person’s viewpoint on the situation and in turn change their decision about the treatment that they want to receive. Religion has and always will play a big part in medicine. Many patients refuse treatment because it goes against their beliefs and later they die to the disease.
Each human services specialist organizations must take after the 4 fundamental standards of medicinal services morals profounder by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress in 1985. A- Autonomy: In therapeutic science it alludes to one side of the patient to hold control over her body. A medicinal services proficient can recommend or exhort, however any activities that endeavor to influence or pressure the patient into settling on a decision are infringement of this standard. B-Non-Maleficence:- It intends to do no damages.