Yet, for a patient, under or over diagnosis becomes problematic when it results in inappropriate treatment based on diagnosis. Clients, however are not the only ones affected by misdiagnosis. As Kirk and Kutchins conferred, “by focusing only on the presumed benefits to clients, clinicians avoid confronting the broad ethical implications that emanate from the practice of misdiagnosis.” (P. 232. 1988). These implications have ethical and practical consequences that are not limited to clients only, but also directly and indirectly affect others, such as clinicians, professional organizations, policymakers, third party payers, taxpayers and the government (1988).
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.
We can partially blame the atrocious experimental research conducted by the doctors exposed by Skloot on the era of American culture in which their research took place in. A time in America’s history where places like The Hospital of the Negro Insane and the belief that your doctor is always right existed and patient advocacy and informed written consent forms did not. Individual and population rights were considered a joke for African American at this time. Throughout the book, black Americans were victims of medical experimentation undisclosed to them. The same is true in the time Henrietta Lacks spent in John Hopkins hospital.
It It f It frustrates me what Dr. Anna Pou had to go through with the lawsuits of the Memorial Medical Center incident. As Healthcare professionals, being sued for making the rightful decision for the patient and the hospital is unjust. Healthcare professionals like Dr. Pou, have taken the Hippocratic oath, and one of the promises made within that oath is “first, do no harm”. Hospital’s should not be so quick to make such an important decision of pressing charges to their faculty; more trust should be placed in them. In addition, she made it clear her intentions were just to ‘‘help’’ patients ‘‘through their pain,’’ on national television.
“Medical malpractice claims and lawsuits deal with Improper, unskilled, or negligent treatment of a patient by a physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or other health care professional. Negligence is the predominant theory of liability concerning allegations of medical malpractice, making this type of litigation part of Tort Law. Since the 1970s, medical malpractice has been a controversial social issue. Physicians have complained about the large number of malpractice suits and have urged legal reforms to curb large damage awards, whereas tort attorneys have argued that negligence suits are an effective way of compensating victims of negligence and of policing the medical profession. A person who alleges negligent medical malpractice
The first being Henrietta Lacks herself, Skloot used the “show, don’t tell” method of writing describing memories from
Her sample tissues were known as HeLa cells. Skloot purpose is to create awareness among the audience about
Doctors, one side of the coin they are viewed as the ones that can cure the sick with their knowledge, the ones that are supposed to help them get better. The other side they are feared and are avoided at all cost by some. Doctors have this bad reputation about them because sometimes they don’t even tell their patients what is wrong with them. Or the patients themselves don’t even question the doctors because they went to school and have a prestigious piece of paper. In “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” by Rebecca Skloot, she describes benevolent deception, which doctors had no trouble of doing in the mid-century, as the doctors keeping their patients in the dark.
When writing her personal essay “In Bed”, author Joan Didion intended it for an audience very familiar with migraines, however, it has the potential to be written for an audience of people just beginning to experience migraines. Didion’s use of personal anecdotes, factual information, and inspiring acceptance are all points that can be altered for this new audience. Didion begins her essay with personal accounts of her experiences with migraines, setting the stage for an introduction that relates to newcomers. She describes the suffering in which she endures during her migrains, composed of imagery that brings the reader into her situation. Where she begins with stating that she “spend[s] the day in bed with a migraine”, she could instead present this as a question to the reader.
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.
Several years ago my grandma had very serious health issues. Each of these examples showcase the fact that it is important for everybody to experience obstacles in their life. In the novel “Cut” the main character, Callie deals with self harm. Callie has a younger brother who suffers from asthma and feels responsible when he has his first asthma attack.
In this case study the primary nurse, Amelia Wilkerson, is caring for a patient, Katy Palmer who has recently been admitted to the hospital for fatigue and abnormal lab counts. The patient asks Amelia for information regarding her diagnosis. Amelia has seen Katy’s results and knows that she has been diagnosed with acute myelogenous leukemia. The ethical dilemma seen in this situation is that it is outside of the scope of practice for Amelia to discuss Katy’s original diagnosis with her.
Wednesday, October 22 Reading Response 2 “Living Will” by Danielle Ofri is about an author who is a doctor who came across a patient that is suicidal. “They All Just Went Away” by Joyce Carol Oates is about a young lonely girl who finds herself attracted in entering abandoned house and is entranced by other peoples lives and what they left by. Although these stories are very different, I believe both the authors share a similar idea, but different outlooks, of how the main characters in each essay struggle to do the right thing. “Living Will” gives us a better perspective of what doctors today have to face with their jobs. The author, Danielle Ofri, came across a severely ill patient, Wilburn Reston, which really makes her think.