ethical issue
.docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Sault College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
HCA115
Subject
Health Science
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by CaptainCheetahPerson897
Introduction
of
the
Issue:
The
ethical
dilemma
at
hand
revolves
around
a
concerning
practice
observed
during
my
internship
in
a
prosthodontic
department
in
India.
Specifically,
my
professor,
after
examining
one
patient,
chose
to
rinse
her
gloved
hands
under
running
water
rather
than
changing
gloves
before
proceeding
to
examine
another
patient.
This
raises
a
fundamental
question
regarding
the
adherence
to
infection
control
protocols
and
the
potential
risks
associated
with
such
actions.
The
primary
stakeholders
in
this
scenario
include
the
patients,
the
healthcare
provider
(the
professor),
and
the
broader
healthcare
community.
Background:
As
part
of
my
internship,
|
was
posted
in
the
prosthodontics
department,
where
|
was
under
the
guidance
of
Professor
Ms.
Gupta,
the
head
of
the
prosthodontic
department.
The
internship
was
an
opportunity
for
me
to
learn
and
gain
hands-on
experience
in
the
field.
One
busy
afternoon,
the
dental
clinic
was
abuzz
with
patients,
each
waiting
their
turn
for
various
procedures.
Professor
Gupta,
known
for
her
efficiency
and
wealth
of
experience,
was
moving
briskly
between
treatment
rooms,
attending
to
one
patient
after
another.
|
admired
her
skill
and
hoped
to
absorb
as
much
knowledge
as
possible
during
the
internship.
In
one
particular
room,
a
patient
was
scheduled
for
a
prosthodontic
examination.
Professor
Gupta,
with
her
signature
poise,
gloved
up
and
began
the
examination.
|
observed
from
a
distance,
taking
mental
notes
on
the
thoroughness
and
precision
with
which
she
worked.
The
patient,
satisfied
with
the
consultation,
exited
the
room,
making
way
for
the
next
in
line.
To
my
surprise,
instead
of
changing
her
gloves,
Professor
Gupta
casually
approached
the
sink
and
turned
on
the
faucet.
She
rinsed
her
gloved
hands under
running
water
for
a
few
seconds,
a
gesture
that
seemed
out
of
place
given
the
strict
hygiene
protocols
drilled
into
the
interns
during
their
training.
Without
a
word,
Professor
Gupta
moved
to
the
next
patient
waiting
in
the
adjacent room.
|
was
torn
between
respect
for
my
mentor
and
her
commitment
to
proper
hygiene
practices.
I,
being
a
fresh
intern
could
not
gathered
the
courage
to
approach
Professor
Gupta
after
the
examination
to
inquire
about
the
unusual
practice.
However,
till
today
i
repent
for
not
approaching
and
asking
her
for
the
malpractice.
e
Current
Status:
In
the
observed
situation,
the
professor
opted
to
rinse
her
gloved
hands
under
running
water,
seemingly
dismissing
the
necessity
of
changing
gloves
between
patient
examinations.
This
choice
poses
potential
risks
of
transmitting
pathogens
from
one
patient
to
another,
violating
the
established
infection
control
norms.
Personally,
witnessing
this
scenario
generated
a
sense
of
ethical
unease,
as
it
directly
contradicted
the
principles
of
patient
well-
being
and
safety
that
form
the
bedrock
of
healthcare
ethics.
Conflict
of
admiration
and
ethical
concerns:
You
found
yourself
caught
between
respecting
Professor
Gupta's
efficiency
and
experience,
and
your
ethical
concerns
regarding
the
deviation
from
hygiene
protocols
observed
during
the
prosthodontic
examination.
e
Importance
of
aseptic
techniques:
As
a
dental
intern,
|
likely
understood
the
critical
role
of
maintaining
aseptic
techniques
in
ensuring
patient
safety
and
preventing
the
spread
of
infections.
This
understanding
heightened
my
internal
conflict
when
witnessing
a
departure
from
established
hygiene
standards.
e
Consideration
of
malpractice:
Your
use
of
the
term
"malpractice"
in
retrospect
suggests
that
you
may
have
perceived
Professor
Gupta's
actions
as
a
deviation
from
established
ethical
standards.
This
choice
of
language
indicates
the
seriousness
of
the
ethical
concerns
you
felt
during
the
incident.
e
Reluctance
to
approach
a
seasoned
professional:
Your
hesitancy
to
approach
Professor
Gupta
after
the
examination
could
be
attributed
to
your
status
as
a
new
intern,
unsure
about
guestioning
a
highly
experienced
mentor.
This
dynamic
may
have
contributed
to
the
internal
conflict
you
experienced.
e
Lingering
regret:
The
statement
expressing
regret
for
not
addressing
the
issue
with
Professor
Gupta
at
the
time
suggests
a
persistent
ethical
discomfort.
This
regret
implies
a
recognition
that
you
missed
an
opportunity
to
uphold
ethical
standards
and
address
the
deviation
from
hygiene
protocols
directly.
e
Moral
dilemma:
Your
experience
can
be
characterized
as
a
moral
dilemma,
involving
conflicting
values
of
professional
respect
for
a
mentor
and
a
commitment
to
ethical
standards.
This
internal
struggle
is
a
common
challenge
faced
by
individuals
in
various
professional
settings.
Evidence
and
Ethical
Principles:
This
situation
raises
concerns
related
to
several
ethical
principles,
with
a
primary
focus
on
beneficence,
non-maleficence,
and
justice.
The
actions
of
the
prosthodontics
professor
risked
harm
to
patients
by
potentially
exposing
them
to
contaminants
from
a
previous
examination.
The
breach
also
challenges
the
principles
of
fairness
and
justice,
as
it
implies
unequal
treatment
of
patients
concerning
infection
control
standards.
Additionally,
the
duty
of
veracity,
which
entails
truthfulness
and
transparency
in
communication,
is
compromised
when
patients
are
not
informed
of
such
unorthodox
practices.
Conclusions:
My
decision
in
this
ethical
dilemma
is
unequivocal
-
adherence
to
established
infection
control
protocols
is
non-negotiable.
The
defense
of
this
decision
draws
upon
ethical
principles
such
as
Non-Maleficence,
emphasizing
the
duty
to
avoid
harm
to
patients,
and
Beneficence,
emphasizing
the
obligation
to
promote
the
well-being
of
patients.
In
conclusion,
the
decision
to
change
gloves
between
patient
examinations
is
not
merely
a
procedural
formality;
it
is
a
manifestation
of
ethical
responsibility
and
commitment
to
patient
safety.
By
upholding
infection
control
protocols,
healthcare
providers
demonstrate
a
dedication
to
the
highest
standards
of
care
and
contribute
to
the overall
integrity
of
the
healthcare
profession.
In
hindsight,
my
decision
to
refrain
from
addressing
the
issue
directly
with
Professor
Gupta
was
a
lapse
in
ethical
responsibility.
|
should
have
prioritized
patient
safety
and
the
integrity
of
the
department's
practices
over
deference
to
authority.
Ethical
principles
of
beneficence
and
non-maleficence
should
have
guided
my
actions,
compelling
me
to
communicate
my
concerns
respectfully
but
firmly.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help