Complicated Medical Issues: Are Doctors Allowed to Do Everything What’s Medical Possible Without the Willing of the Patient?

The two ethical dilemmas that stick out to me in the case are patient autonomy, and distributive justice. Patient autonomy is the patient’s right to make decisions about their care, including whether to accept or decline treatment (Taylor, 2014). Because the patient did not fully understand the information relayed in the consent form or the procedure, her patient autonomy may have been violated. This also may mean the consent form may not be valid. A signed consent form from a patient affords the hospital with an assumed duty to care for that patient (as cited Taylor, 2014). And the patient has given the medical professional permission to provide treatment. Therefore, it is important that the patient fully understands and can communicate that understanding when consenting to

This Rights model, more specifically Ashley’s human rights is very present in the article. It could be argued that she doesn’t need or require the treatment to medically improve her life. The Equal and Human Rights Commission (2008) suggest that human rights are the freedoms that we are all entitled to as a result of our shared humanity. I understand that she is unable to speak and is unlikely to have the mental capacity to make that decision but does that automatically transfer that decision to her parents? The United Nations Convention on the Rights for a Child (1989) plays an important part of the Rights model for this text as I feel it both supports and opposes the parent’s actions. Article 23 concentrates on children’s disability by stating that ‘Children who have any kind of disability have the right to special care and support, as well as all the rights in the Convention, so that they can live full and independent lives.’ This could support Ashley’s parent’s’ motives. However, Article 3 states ‘The best interests of children must be the primary concern in making decisions that may affect them. All adults should do what is best for children. When adults make decisions, they should think about how their decisions will affect children.’ In this case are the parents doing what’s best for Ashley or themselves? This is a good example where the Rights model can get itself in a twist!

Ethical dilemmas for all three cases are is it murder by assisting these three patients no longer suffer. Would there be pain and suffering involved directly by their actions? Are they doing the right thing by helping these people

Although the patient themselves are going through the worst of it, it also takes a toll on the family members and friends who have to watch the patient suffer. An illness in the family is never easy due to the bills and all the time that taking care of the patient takes. It is also hard for the patient to watch their family members and friends suffer and know that it is their fault. The patient should be able to end all of that suffering if it is their choice.

First, the relationship between a doctor and patient is a valuable asset in today’s medical environment. In this case, Merry didn’t understand that her diagnosis was worsening after refusing treatment, her autonomy was to have control of her own life decisions. As a result, Merry’s family chose to deny

The term “medical ethics” is defined by The American Medical Association as “(1) moral principles or practices and (2) matters of social policy involving issues of morality in the practice of medicine.” The nine principles of medical ethics as outlined by the AMA tell how a physician should conduct themselves in the profession, the third and fourth of which states “(3) A physician shall respect the law and also recognize a responsibility to seek changes in those requirements which are contrary to the best interests of the patient. (4) A physician shall respect the rights of patients, colleagues, and other health professionals, and shall safeguard patient confidences and privacy within the constraints of the

The desires of a patient are essential in an ethical medical situation. The physician and court system generally respects the autonomy of patients to make their own decisions. In cases of incompetence or minors, these choices are usually granted to surrogate decision makers or the legal system itself. In the case of Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (Menikoff, 2001), one can see where Nancy Cruzan, a patient in a persistent vegetative state (PVS), was not granted the right to have medical treatment removed. This landmark case presented the discussion of a right to die on a national forum. The reason for such debate is because of the ruling given Supreme Court of the United States in 1990. I contend that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) was wrong in reaffirming the state of Missouri that there was not sufficient

The justification behind the parents giving their daughter The Ashley Treatment were to improve her the quality of life by keeping Ashley from suffering from menstrual pain, and enabling her to become more mobile due to her lack of weight and height. This argument also states that the lives of the parents will be made easier in caring for their terminally disabled

Different ethical theories would view this issue in various ways. Virtue ethics believes in placing a heavy focus on moral character, while focusing less on the action itself. In this situation a virtue ethicist would evaluate if ending or continuing Samantha's treatment would impact her moral character. The beliefs of strong moral character carried by a virtue ethicist would encourage Samantha to further her parents wishes of continuing treatment. A virtue ethicist respect for human life causes them to believe that Samantha should continue treatment because of the courage and strength it shows. However some virtue ethicist might argue that because of the value for human life, Samantha should be allowed to discontinue treatment to end the immense suffering she is in. A virtue ethicist would considered all of the details of the patients suffering before making a

In 2011, 23 year old Katie Sharify was involved in an automobile accident that damaged her spine, leaving her paralyzed from the chest down. Katie’s medical team proposed an experimental approach to her therapy using stem cell research, in which stem cells taken from a 5 day old embryo could be converted into cells used for communication between the brain and body. Seeing the glimmer of hope, Katie accepted. However, the funding was cut shortly after her treatment, and all of the hope she had been clinging to was seemingly lost. Three years and a 14.3 million dollar grant later, however, the research she had participated in was deemed safe and enabled to

Patients cannot always be saved, medical personnel can help patients understand their outcomes. In the listed scenario a 17 year old has Duchene Muscular Dystrophy and multi organ failure. Although the patient is alert, his health continues to decline. Medical personnel feel from a medical perspective they cannot save the patient. The patient is unaware of his declining condition, because his parents asked the medical personnel to remain optimistic and encourage the patient to work towards getting better. The nurse should help the parents understand that they are ethically obligated to be honest and forthcoming with patients. It is the patients’s right to know his medical diagnosis. When everyone is aware of the current medical state of the

Patient And Providers Have Security Concerns - Fear of violating security, privacy laws, HIPAA restrictions, along with the risk of an unauthorized third parties getting access to patient records are all valid reasons why some medical practices have been reluctant to adopt telehealth use.

Ashley is a six and a half years old child with “static encephalopathy.” Her parents request a hysterectomy (to prevent menstruation), surgical removal of nascent buds (to prevent development), and estrogen therapy (to speed up the natural closure of her growth plates). The ethical dilemma is whether these procedures should be done on Ashley based on the parents’ request.

Another concerning medical development created for the care of individuals with disabilities has been the “Ashley Treatment.” First utilized in 1997, but reported conducted on at least a dozen patients in the U.S. since then, this treatment has been used on young girls with severe intellectual disabilities whose parents obtained

The case of Karen Ann Quinlan led to four basic approaches to this ethical problem; advance directives or other clear evidence of the patients wishes while competent, surrogate decision making (power of attorney), and action in the patients best interest. Each solution has deficiencies both in theory and practice, but there can be no debate that their application has changed the landscape of medical ethics.