The doctor suggested a route of further treatment, but the patient made an informed decision that went against the suggestion. The doctor abided by the principle of beneficence and non-maleficence by suggesting a more beneficial and least harmful route while also respecting the autonomy of the patient. In this example and in many others, beneficence is an important principle because perhaps a patient would change their decision if they were given a route that was more beneficial to them and their situation. By doctors and other healthcare professionals giving patients the most beneficial treatments, they are ensuring that patients have all the options available to them when they make a rational
Autonomy: In a healthcare setting, the right of a patient to make informed choices about their body is defined as autonomy. The moral principle of respect for autonomy directs healthcare providers to refrain from preventing patients from making their own decisions unless these choices pose serious risks to the patient or society. This means that an informed and competent patient has the ability to either accept or decline treatments, surgeries and medications. From the information gathered in the assignment case, it can be assumed that Joseph is in a rational state of mind. It can be argued that the standard of autonomy has not been met since the doctor has not fully informed Joseph of the reasons why he should quit smoking and lower his BMI
Often times, a patient wants a doctor or nurse that maintains professionalism, but also shows compassion and empathy (Cohn, 2010). A doctor or nurse must carry out their duty to provide the best care possible and make sure their patient feels as though they are a part of the care plan. However, it is also important to maintain empathetic when a patient is having a hard time dealing with a diagnosis. A great way to balance these two, is to be empathetic for the patient’s circumstance, but to also not be too affected emotionally. It is alright to sometimes be emotional with patients, but the patient should not have to feel like they have to support their doctor or nurse.
Patients have a right to privacy and non-interference. The healthcare professionals are obligated to give needed information to patients and relate the risks, and the benefits of a test/treatment. The detail information given will allow the patient to make the best decision on what he/she chooses to do. Hiding information about a diagnosis or not revealing the potential complications because a patient may refuse care seems unethical. Patients have the right to know about their health to make informed
Although they rejected his autonomy the doctors gave him alternatives to decide upon regarding his decision to die. Even though the psychiatrist declared Donald was fully competent, it doesn’t mean he was in the right emotional mindset to make a life decision. In one day he lost everything that we as humans need to function on a daily basis, and he also lost his dad whom he was extremely close to. It is logical to argue that Donald’s decision to die was clouded by those factors to a point that he couldn’t see that the treatment were best for
Which further allows the individual to make an appropriate decision in their own interest even if not the best interest. For example, PTs consider a certain intervention to be more beneficial to the patient and the patient is not willing to undergo the treatment; in such circumstances it is the duty of the therapist to explain the need of the intervention and also provide the patient with other treatment options available and leave the decision for the patient to make depending on what suits him/her the best. Autonomy and beneficence have different ideologies but they need to be in sync for the healthcare provider to strike a balance between both and obtain optimum health care for the patient. Even with such an ethical dilemma it is the duty of the health care worker to provide appropriate information to the patient and to convince the individual to make the best choice without affecting the autonomy of the patient. [2,
Support groups we can attach to accountability and clinical counseling as those that are wise helping us. Medical management can neith rer be proven or disproven. The last part I want to mention is forgiveness. “Forgiveness does not mean condoning or excusing what happened in the past. Nor does it mean forgetting, accepting the behavior of the other, reconciling with the other, suppressing feelings of hurt, or losing one’s moral compass or outrage at injustice” (229).
The government is saying that physicians are role models and should be viewed as people who save lives, not people who take life away. Opponents contend that physician-assisted suicide undermines doctors’ roles in society. According to American Medical Association, “Allowing physicians to participate in assisted suicide would cause more harm than good” (Fuller). The community looks up to doctors, especially the sickly elders. They might be influenced to seek help in easing their suffering.
In contrast, opponents of euthanasia argue that doctors should not practice euthanasia, even if the patient has requested it through their living will. Opponents claim that a healthy person cannot fathom how they would feel on their deathbed
By labeling treatment as unnecessary, the doctor suggests that we are in a situation where the treatment does not bring any medical benefit. Of course, in ordinary situations, to not recommend unnecessary treatment it depends of good medical practice, and it is the subject of many studies, protocols and lessons of continuing medical education. In these situations, the decision on the futility of a treatment is a decision to rationalize costs. In life and death situations, however, the physician must ensure that by declaring that one treatment is useless, he has not been driven by costs and does not make an economic judgment. In this case it would be a serious mistake to label his own decision as futility.