Case Study Deontological Viewpoint

Overall, deontology is based upon not just by following universal rules or performing what is ought to do, but by respecting human beings as rational beings as well. Deontology judges the ethical motive of an action not by its consequences, merely by the reasoning behind it.

Throughout history there has been many ethical dilemmas that have resulted in change, and many that have still not been resolve. These dilemmas often result in controversial issues arising, and both sides of the spectrum arguing as to which proposed idea is the morally correct one. Today, there is an enormous controversy in the ethical dilemma involving child care. This issue revolves around whether the views of the parents should be upheld when their child is in danger medically. To further assess the impact of this ethical dilemmas, a case study involving the treatment implemented on a child by a physician while opposing the views and wishes held by the parents will be analyzed in terms of the ethics of the situation, the stakeholders, values,

The decision of the Supreme Court could be considered ethically right. It was right to revoke the physicians’ decision, as it wasn’t in agreement with what the Canadian Health Care Consent act (HCCA) section 26 stipulates “A health practitioner shall not administer a treatment under section 25 if he has reasonable grounds to believe that the person, while capable and after attaining 16 years of age, expressed a wish applicable to the circumstances to refuse consent to the treatment.”3 Also, in medical ethics, it is the obligation of health care providers to allow the patients to make their own medical decisions. They should have autonomy in their decision making, that’s if they completely comprehend all the medical diagnosis, prognosis and all outcome of treatment options4. Starson had a full understanding of his options, he was fully

Paternalism not so long ago was the model used in patient relations, it embodies two main ethical principles: beneficence—doing good- and non-maleficence—preventing harm. Dr. Fox could have prevented harm by considering the family’s wishes, and would have done

In cases were no legal cases have bearing on the issue, courts should turn to other disciplines for authority if, and only if, the alternative authority has expertise and knowledge on the issue beyond that of the court. In this case, the court could have looked at an outside discipline, such as a hospital ethics committee, for authority.

There are many conflicts that arise between doctors and patient’s families. As stated in the articles, “Some patients, or their families wanted aggressive treatment up to the very end” (Keith 1). This quote is followed by a series of facts about how keeping someone who is not benefiting from treatment is taking away from someone who is that can’t get the resources for the treatment. When a family member or patient is sick people only see what they believe is best for them, not for other

Deontology considers rights an impassable barrier, they are inarguable facts defending the way people are treated and what they are allowed to do. In the U.S. the bill of rights is a perfect example of this, a document meant specifically to tell the people what they can expect when it comes to treatment. The bill of rights is typically seen from a deontological point of view, these rights are an area that should not be trespassed upon. For example, child labor is taking away the rights of children to be children. A deontologist would consider this unacceptable as it takes a barrier put in place by some higher power and reduces them to suggestions. Accordingly, deontology would defend against practices it sees as being against individuals rights.

I truly agreed with the judge in his decision against the Catholic hospital. His decision in ruling the Catholic hospital to be in the wrong simply clarifies and justifies the importance and reasons of a hospital, which is to provide medical services to those in need. Just because it was against the Catholic principles in life, they should have still abided by the Principle of Informed Consent. There

Another dominant opinion by surveyed respondents justified that a doctor may try to override the decisions but with some religious view it won’t be allowed. This primary evidence correlates with other sources such as (Pearl, 2014), which identify that a doctor will only try to override a parent if the law will allow them to and if it is in the best interest of the child. Evidently some religion may not allow for this to happen.

I have been reading the latest news regarding Cassandra C., the teen with Hodgkin’s lymphoma who refused treatment but was forced into receiving it by a Connecticut Supreme Court ruling. As a mother and a bioethicist, these are the times when reconciling my personal opinions with my professional experience can be most challenging. Many of my “mom” friends were shocked and horrified by the image of a young woman being restrained to a bed, forced to undergo treatment. They had visions of a screaming pained girl, a mother helpless to save her child, and “big brother” dispensing poison to an innocent girl whirled through our collective mind.

Chemotherapy is uncomfortable and can very painful for as long as six months. There is no way for the doctors, the teen or the courts to know if the cancer can be cured or in what time. This case has several conflicts due to the many people involved in the dilemma. The first conflict is what the teen wants and what her rights are. Then consider the parent’s feelings and needs for their daughter. Finally, the healthcare individuals have a duty to the teen’s well-being and life

There are many legal and ethical situations that healthcare providers will be faced with when providing medical treatment to either a child or an elderly adult. While there is often much discussion regarding the elderly and do not resuscitate orders, there are often times when the decisions for health care of a child may be overlooked. Some of the legal issues that may be faced by healthcare professionals are informed consent, confidentiality, reproductive services and child abuse. Patients have the right to decide what is done to their own bodies, but for children under eighteen, their parents decide for them. A major issue faced by healthcare professionals is parental refusal for treatment. Healthcare providers will be faced with many conflicting ethical and legal situations regarding refusal of a minor’s healthcare and treatment. These issues

The underlying issue, in this case, is what Charlie’s parents wanted and what was in the best interests of Charlie. We have an issue of autonomy, or “a person’s rational capacity for self-governance” (Vaughn, 2017, p. 81), for both the parents and child. Charlie’s parents wanted to try every possible treatment even though, at a certain point, continuing to treat Charlie would no longer do anything for him. This involves several moral values, including the responsibility of the parents to make decisions about their child’s treatment and the responsibility of the doctors to do what is best for Charlie. Charlie’s MDDS is incurable, and at the time of his diagnosis, there were no approved treatments for the disorder. He was getting progressively worse and was being kept alive by the use of a ventilator after suffering from a seizure that caused brain damage. At this point, the hospital deemed Charlie’s treatment to be futile and they decided to stop his treatment. Their decision to stop treatment was

Describe the main principles of the two normative ethical theories of deontology and utilitarianism. Compare and contrast the two theories, bringing out any problems or limitations you see in each.

Historically ethics was studied from a philosophical aspect and viewed as the science of morals. Ethics had been defined as the principles of moral conduct that govern our behavior. Our ethical behavior is developed from various factors, to include our environment, family and beliefs. The origins of ethics can be traced back to the fifth century, BC ( Banner, 1968, pg.67). Plato, Socrates and Aristotle are among the early teachers of ethics.