Contract and Professor Knox Group Essay

This is the case of benevolent deception as the information regarding the patient health conditions was not revealed. The healthcare professionals withheld the important health information to protect patient from harm i.e. stress and depression. In addition, they thought that it is not an act of lying and morally permissible as it was benefitting the patient. Fry et al. (2011) mentioned that the Hippocratic Oath and the Florence Nightingale Pledge tell us to do what will benefit the patient and protect

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

According to Higgs, one reason why a medical profession might withhold the truth from the patient is that : it may actually do harm through anxiety and distress that's produced after disclosing the truth. At times, truth-telling can lead to major/acute distress or long term disability. There can also be times where distress and fear can lead to a more severe condition of an illness or even causing a patient to deny the treatment. In either way, there is a high chance that the worsening of the illness may occur after a physician disclosing the truth to his/her

Enforceable contract Peter v. Don. Peter will have an enforceable contract with Don if he can show that all the required elements of a contract are present. If there is a contract between the two then it will be governed by the common law requirements of an enforceable contract instead of the Uniformed Commercial Code, which would be used if their agreement had involved the sale of goods. In order for a contract to be formed between Peter and Don the two must react mutual consent Mutual consent can generally be formed through the form of an (A) offer and (B) acceptance. An additional requirement for both parties to show (C) consideration is also

Another issue with the implementation of Informed consent arises when the patient waives the right to Informed consent and leaves the right to make the decision on the physician. Though legally correct, this can cause psychological stress for the physician especially when the decision is about a life threatening medical condition. Moreover, this also makes the patient vulnerable to abuse. (Manthous, DeGirolamo, 2003)

Currently, most people generally accept a doctor’s word as truth and do not question him or her. When it comes to the medical field, patients can often feel overwhelmed by all the confusing medical terms being thrown at them, so they tend to sit back and do as the doctor says. Healthcare professionals sometimes take advantage of this fact and withhold important information from their patients. For instance, a study conducted by Lisa Lezzoni, MD, and her peers states that more than half of physicians lied to their patients about their diagnosis to put a more positive spin on it (Lezzoni, Rao, DesRoches, Vogeli, and Campbell). Healthcare professionals should disclose to the patient any information pertaining to the patient.

Privacy legislation and the legal complexities surrounding the ownership and management of patient information, many physicians are wary about when they may or may not release such information to patient and other parties. All patients have the right to the information in their medical records. In certain situations the physicians have the right to refuse the release of patient information to the patient, if the have any reason to believe that the disclosed information would have a reverse effect on the patient’s mental, physical, emotional health, or cause harm to a third party. When needed to be transferred a copy of the information may be sent directly from the former physician to the new one. In other circumstance the patient can receive the record themselves and hand it directly to the new physician. It is recommended that the original files are not released, instead a photocopy or scan of it may be sent. A physician may release patient information to lawyers and other parties when requested to do so only if the patient or the patient's substitute decision-maker has given authorization, preferably in writing, or if authorized by law or a court order.When information is

Confidentiality in the Healthcare arena can be simply defined as the moral and ethical duty of the Practitioner to keep all the patient’s bio-data under lock and key, and offer a disclosure of those facts that the patient is legally mandated to disclose or deems fit to enhance their positive health outcome. According to the Segen’s Medical Dictionary, “Confidentiality is the ethical principle that a physician may not reveal any information disclosed in the course of medical care, unless the patient who disclosed that information poses a threat to him, herself or others’’

A newspaper columnist signs a contract with a newspaper chain. Several months later she is offered a position with another newspaper chain at a higher salary. Because she would prefer making more money, she notifies the first chain that she is breaking her contract. The courts will decide the legality of her action. But what of the morality? Did the columnist behave ethically?

Lillard, Monique C., Fifty Jurisdictions in Search of a Standard: The Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in the Employment Context, 57 Mo. L. Rev. (1992)

Yeo (2010) point out that the possibility to retain some information from patients has been ordered for long in Australian law, as in other countries for the benefit of the patient. This has now been combined with the greater autonomy acknowledged to the patient in many jurisdictions. Although a clinical approach reveals that loyalty should guide the patient-physician relationship, there are still some situations in which information consent and truth telling may be controversial: in some circumstances, the physician should or may not tell the truth. The case at hand poses a dilemma regarding the right to know (Cherry & Jacob 2008).

Doctors think that they have the right not to tell the truth to their patients because of their paternalistic view. They point at patients’ misunderstanding of diagnosis because of the esoteric information and patients’ lacking of making best choices due to their illnesses or medicine to support this view. Although these are true, doctors just think for one side and they generalize it. To go into further detail, knowing the truth is a

Contractual agreements are supposed to be consensual, and freely entered into by the parties involved. Therefore, ‘before a court enforces a relationship as a contract, the courts must have a reasonably certain basis in fact to justify binding the parties to each other.’ (St. John’s Law Scholarship Repository, no date). Resolution of whether a contract was intended to be legally binding is not determined by what the parties themselves thought or intended. Rather, a more objective stance is taken by the courts. This is known as the objective theory of contract, and essentially enables ‘the courts to look at external evidence (what the parties said and did at the time)’ (Poole, 2006, p. 34), as to objectively indicate the parties’ intentions

Contract Law Case Study Both the parties in the question have come to a problematic situation

On the formation of the Social Contract Theory has a long history, many people have formed Social Contract Theory has made a great contribution. Thomas Hobbes as one of the representatives of Modern Social Contract Theory, his departure from the theory of human nature, to a fictional state of nature as a starting point, put forward the basic principles of natural law, natural rights, and then through the Social Contract Theory, the establishment of his country theory. Thomas Hobbes certain extent, played a significant role, for people to bring enlightenment. But his theory does not apply in all cases; we need to analyze different aspects of different problems. In this essay, I will describe the Social Contract Theory, and explain the problem of how do we get out of the State of Nature raised by Hobbes Game. I explain the idea of cooperation that Thomas Hobbes can give to this problem, and then argue that this is not a satisfactory response to the problem for three reasons.