Crime Of Consent Case Study

This is a prominent principle throughout the book, as patients typically appreciate having a say in their own fate. A patient’s control of their care varies from case to case, but the agents in the novel did their best to respect the patient’s decisions.

Hello all, my name is David Jamison, MHA. I am representing Marion General Hospital as the committee chairman of the ethics committee. I am currently reviewing the case involving female patient Margie Whitson. The patient is a 95 year old patient whom wishes to have her pace maker “turned off”, due to her unwillingness to live. The death of her only remaining son was the last event that, that had forced her to contemplate the reason why she still lives. Mrs. Margie Whitson is no stranger to loss. When she was younger, she lost her youngest son to a severe motor vehicle accident that took his life at the early age of 30. She injured herself over 10 years ago, and received a hip fracture. Her most recently bout was

In the Code of Ethics for Nurses provision 4 states “The nurse has authority, accountability, and responsibility for nursing practice; makes decisions; and takes action consistent with the obligation to promote health and to provide optimal care.” This was not done, there was no regard for human life. The patients in the hospital were treated as a burden. A meeting was held where the doctors agreed that

Though ethics committees have been helpful, scores of physician-patient disagreements end up in the U.S. court system with inconsistent results. The states adopted individual “statutes regulating DNR orders and their provisions vary in analysis throughout the U.S.” (Bishop, Brothers, Perry & Ahmad, 2010). One ethical dilemma that is constant in emergency rooms, the intensive care unit and terminally ill persons is a futility of treatment. In the case of CPR/DNR, New York State wanted to enact a law that describes the decisive responsibilities of the patient, and the family or surrogate, and physician. “In April 2003, the New-York Attorney General asserted that the DNR law would require a physician to obtain a consent of the patient’s health care surrogate before entering a DNR order, even when the physician

McDonald and McIntyre (2014) explain there are four ethical principles, and all of them are involved in the case scenario. Because the primary physician assumed that the client did not have the capability to make rational decision in regard to his own DNR status, the physician disregarded this patient’s autonomy (Laurentian University, n.d; McDonald & McIntyre, 2014). On the other hand, if the physician continued to treat the patient’s disease appropriately as patient’s wish, the patient’s autonomy is partially supported (Laurentian University, n.d; McDonald &

Working in the field as health care professionals, we are faced with ethical dilemmas almost always. Although each individual posses different values, there are specific codes of conduct to abide by, despite personal beliefs. Without the use of a structural code, individuals in the health care field would make decisions based on their own personal beliefs in accordance to their culture and religion. In the case of Marion and the pacemaker, we witness the desires of the patient at hand, Marion, and her family, be interrogated by the floor nurses. Although the intent behind the actions of the floor nurses can be described as morally just, thinking they are helping preserve the life of Marion, based on medical ethics, their behavior is of some degree to be questioned. This paper will focus on the boundaries we witness crossed by floor nurses and how they go against the medical ethics approved, and what effects they have on patients and their care givers.

The nurses did not act as sentries towards the patient or the family. They did not protect the patient’s choice to die in peace, instead they just let the doctor jump in into the situation and try to resuscitate her even though she did not want that.The nurses should have stepped in and asked the frazzled husband what he wants the nurses and doctor to do. Not let the doctor yell at him until he is forced to allow it.

Mr. B, the patient’s brother is Mr. E’s designee to make healthcare decisions in the event that he is unable to do so for himself. He is left to make these decisions without a code of ethics or without medical knowledge. He counts on the medical professionals to assist him. He has an ethical obligation to abide by his brothers wishes and directives. He is influenced by his own beliefs and his perceptions of what his brother would want. If he has the good faith belief that his brother did not understand the need for the ventilator or the outcome of refusing the treatment, then it is not unreasonable or unethical

CNA Code of Ethics for Registered Nurses (2008) provides guidance in dealing with cases like this by explaining the core nursing values and responsibilities involved which are: a) providing safe, compassionate, competent and ethical care; b) promoting health and well-being; c) promoting and respecting informed decision-making, and d) Preserving dignity; e) maintaining confidentiality, f) promoting justice and g) being accountable. The first nursing value is always expected to be upheld in any case because it is their duty to provide care using appropriate safety precautions and preventing/minimizing all forms of violence (CNA, 2008). The collaboration of the nurses between the physician and Mr. C’s family has been evident since then. This therefore calls Mr. C’s nurses to be more compassionate about his situation and try to recognize where he is coming from as they build a trust-worthy relationship before judging him or jumping into conclusions like he does not want to live anymore. Even if he decides to withdraw from these potentially life-sustaining treatments, health care providers are still obliged to give him the care he need the best way they can up until the end of his life. The second nursing value, just like the first one, still calls nurses to still aim to promote or at least maintain Mr. C’s health and well-being to the highest possible level regardless of the path he had chosen for his life. This can be achieved by continuing to collaborate well with other

There are many ethical issues involved in the scenario provided. De Segonzac (2016) presented a scenario where a DNR patient is being resuscitated against her wishes. In the scenario, Dr. Natalie Manning is attempting to stop Dr. Will Halstead from going against a patient’s DNR order. He continues to ask the husband if he “wants her to live”, while the daughter is asking her father to help her mother. Dr. Halstead blatantly goes against the patient’s known wishes by performing CPR on her.

Ethical principals are the seed of which nursing flourishes from. Many ethical principals were involved and dishonored in this case such as, justice, autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, confidentiality and fidelity (Burkhardt et al., 2014). I believe justice was the main principal involved as the entire ethical predicament was revolved around unjust behavior and treatment of the residents. The residents were treated poorly and given unequal rights as a causation of their illnesses. Autonomy, an essential piece of human rights was also being violated in this ethical dilemma. The residents did not have any choice or independence in their care or how they were being treated. Beneficence and non-maleficence are significant dynamics of this ethical situation, as the health care providers needed to reflect on how they can have the maximum benefit while diminishing possible damage to the residents (Burkhardt et al., 2014). Our actions as nurses should always be beneficent and non maleficent, continuously being kind, compassionate and doing what is in their best interest as well a removing and preventing harm. Confidentiality is a key component of nursing and it was blatantly being violated as the health care

My opinion has not changed with Erin’s dilemma. I firmly believe that all health care providers must act by the law within their moral conscious. The nurse going to the clinic to help Erin would not have been supported by her employer and is not in the scope of her job title which exposes her to a list of liabilities. She needs to practice following her state and local restrictions and never deviate especially with a minor. She should have stopped Erin midsentence with the confession and advised her of her legal obligations and boundaries to assist.

The concept of consent is really easy to understand. If someone agrees to engage in sexual intercourse/ intimacy then they are giving you their consent to do so. However, if someone does not agree or does not give a clear YES, then that individual does not 100% commit to the act. An individual should also never be persuaded, forced, or taken advantage of when they are under the influence. Consent is important because it is our right to protect our bodies, and not complying with an individual who does not give consent could lead to criminal charges and a lifetime of criminal reputation. Therefore, it is always important to remember YES means YES and NO means NO.

Across our society, communities alike have rigorously debated about the moral importance of consent. Ranging from college communities filled with young adults to family communities with young children and protective parents, the topic of consent and what constitutes legitimate consent have been apart of a continuous debate. Some argue that if one is either slightly, obviously or completely inebriated or intoxicated, then the consent is not legitimate while others argue that no matter how inebriated or intoxicated one is, if they are still conscious, their consent is by all means legitimate. Among these debaters is Joan McGregor, author of “ Is It Rape?”

The autonomy of a competent patient is an issue not often debated in medical ethics. Refusal of unwanted treatment is a basic right, likened to the common law of battery, available to all people capable of a competent choice. These fundamental rules of medical ethics entered a completely new forum as medical technology developed highly effective life-sustaining care during the 20th century. Several watershed cases elucidated these emerging issues in the 1960’s and 70’s, none more effectively than that of Karen Ann Quinlan. Fundamentally, this case established that a once-competent patient without the possibility of recovery could have their autonomy exercised by a surrogate in regard to the