Cultural Diversity

Katz states, “the conviction that physicians should decide what is best for their patients, and, therefore, that the authority and power to do so should remain bested in them, continued to have deep hold on the practices of the medical profession “(214).

In this case Dr. Rose was but in a dangerous situation that could’ve ended badly. She came into contact to something that she was allergic to. This breaks a legal obligation of having a safe environment for their patients. Ethically, Chrissy was not honest. She did not hold up to her ethically obligation have integrity. Furthermore, some attribution errors Chrissy made towards Dr. Rose was assume she didn’t know what she was talking about. So when she went about communicating with Dr. Rose, it was demonstrated to be someone talking down or talking at her. This influences Chrissy to disregard some of the things Dr. Rose said. She often discredit

In that time, a treatment plan has been formulated and is as follows: take the medicine prescribed, eat healthy, exercise daily. This treatment plan is lacking in ways to actually improve daily quality of life and is a result of hurried, inattentive, and prejudiced physicians with whom my mother has a troubled relationship. In an article on concordance, Bissell, May, and Noyce emphasize the importance of the patient’s experience, goals, and knowledge in interactions between doctors and patients (Bissell et al, 2004). The treatment plan does not acknowledge or address my mother’s experiences, goals, or knowledge of her disease. Her experiences with doctors has been disappointing at best. She recalls a former primary care physician who, after listening to her describe her symptoms and the way she felt, would pat her on the knee and tell her, “Well, you look pretty good so you can’t feel that bad.” In an appointment for a cyst on her knee, the doctor chastised her for being on a plethora of medications, saying she was too young to be having so many problems. Upon examining her cyst, he told her that the cyst could not be causing the amount of pain she was having and if she really wanted it gone, she needed to “Give it a good ol’ whack with a Bible.” He further accused her of doctor hopping and drug seeking before sending her out of his office in tears. The doctor she saw specifically for pain was “too busy” to administer the

Isabella, it is good to see that you took a moral approach to this dilemma; the strengths of your argument is in your personal conviction that you needed to do the right thing in this situation, regardless of how important it could be for anyone else that you to take an unlawful action. Just as significant was you’re the effectiveness in trying to persuade Dr. Jones to take the right course of action. You turn it all around on him, so that he would consider how the wrong decision could destroy his medical career, and hurt what he treasures the most, his family and his patients.

Duty owed patient – As a nurse we have a duty to provide the best possible care to all of our patients within our scope of practice. Providing best care requires assessing our patients and reporting any abnormalities to the health care team so further action can be taken. It is not within the nurses scope of practice to make medical diagnosis or to initiate interventions in which they do not have physician orders for. For this reason it is essential for the nurses to communicate to the doctor when further evaluation and interventions are needed for the patient. The two nurses failed to do so.

Since she was considered an at will employee the employer is able to terminate her for any reason so if they wanted to terminate her for refusing to participate in the clinical testing they legally could. I do not think that the pharmaceutical’s management should have the right to terminate Nancy simply because she refused to be a part of the clinical testing. I do believe she could be taken out of the team because she would not be able to participate in the research or making of the drug. However, I do not think it is a reason for her termination. Management had no complains of her work prior to this situation so therefor I believe she should be removed from the project but not terminated. Her ethical reasoning made sense and she was following the Hippocratic Oath that prevented her from giving the drug to children and elderly.

According to Pozgar (2016), “Physicians must, as provided in the Hippocratic oath and codes of ethics, make care decisions for the benefit of their patients and not for their hurt or for any wrong” (p. 346). In the case study “Physician Lacks Compassion”, it is possible to identify some violations to the principles of medical ethics. As stated by the American Medical Association (AMA) (n.d.) “A physician shall be dedicated to providing competent care, with compassion and respect for human dignity and rights” (Overview). Unfortunately, on the case mentioned above, Dr. Mean failed to be dedicated to providing care to Mrs. Smith, his patient. Mrs. Smith had been waiting for her appointment and her health status has deteriorated, however, that was not a sufficient reason for the scheduler to make a space for a new appointment as soon as possible.

Wilson and Dr. Cameron is paternalistic. That is, the physician is expected to do what is medically best for the patient. Dr. Cameron is concerned about Mr. Wilson’s economic stability however, she should be concern about his health and rather then prescribing a medication that is cheaper she should try to find a way to provide the medication to the patient. Paternalism and beneficence are important in the physician-patient relationship because of the physician’s superior technical knowledge and access to pharmaceuticals and medical technology. Despite the importance of patient involvement and informed consent, physicians are expected to do what is best for their patients regardless of the

The idea of always doing the right thing is supported by a boy named Peter in the movie Pan. He is enslaved in a work camp with thousands of other boys, where they were forced to mine gems for the powerful empire. Everyone else there had abandoned the idea that they would ever be free; however Peter did what he knew was right even though he ran the risk of being killed. He rallied a small militia by giving them hope and rebelled against the cruel empire. As a result of his courageous actions he, and all of the

Regarding the autonomy of patients, Susan has not the right to decide the treatment she wants due to her mental illness. Furthermore, when she requests a brain scan the doctor was not sure if that will help in the diagnosis but he orders a test because she wants that. However, Patients with physiological factitious disorder attempt to make up signs and symptoms to show an illness or disease. So, it is one of the doctor's duty to convince her about the risk of taking those medications without having the disease. As she suggests taking acetylcholinesterase inhibitors because she believes she has dementia although this drug has several side effects including Headache, Insomnia, and Vomiting. Finally, as she mentioned she is aware of the drugs

On my observation now-I was not asked or debriefed at the time, nor did I imitate critically then-is that the circumstances and outcomes dictate that the doctor and members thereof acted less than professionally, and their conclusion and actions were not finely balanced, leaving the patients in a an unethical and morally conciliation position. The patient had owed a duty of care, which had not been provided by all involved at the critical moments. So although all parties worked from a position of beneficence, obliging to do good for all patients at the time, there is also a team failure in justifying their

At first, I started contemplating whether the patient was right to be upset or if my physician was correct with his treatment toward the man. Immediately, my first thought was that obviously the physician was right as this patient was just enraged because he could not have his narcotics. However, as I recalled the event in my head, it just did not sit right with me. Since no one left the situation happy,

Case Study: Ethical Dilemma and the Principle-Based Approach Mrs. Williams, a 50-year-old woman, visiting Dr. Garrison, has smoked two packs per day for the last 30 years. After Dr. Garrison ordered chest x-rays and reviewed Mrs. Williams old films from her last visit for pneumonia, four months ago, Dr. Garrison believes she may have cancer or it could just be pneumonia again. Dr. Garrison that a CT scan would be the best way to proceed to find out if it is cancer or pneumonia. Mrs. Williams wants to wait six weeks for her insurance at her new job to go into effect and recalls that her cousin did not have insurance while going through his lung cancer treatments and now his family is bankrupt.

Hello Alistair, I disagree with you about the hospital followed legal protocol by contacting the patient’s husband. The patient was in her right mind, so it was the patient decision not the husband decision to make. If the patient was not conscious or in her right mind, then the hospital should have contacted the husband. What make you believe that Mrs. Dubruil was incompetent? Because I believe the patient was well informed and aware of the situation, so that made her able to make any decisions on whatever treatment she receive.

Even if we cannot halt the passage of time or stop the water from flowing, our actions in the present have the power to direct the stream so that once we learn to swim we are able to choose what we do with our lives. If our time is biologically limited and if we need each other, in order to be personally fulfilled, it stands to reason that we should strive for a “good life” for everyone, so how can we do more “good?" If there is a mechanism which absolves us from our responsibility to be good, what is it? The simple answer could be that we are human.