Essay about HSM 542 You Decide

This ethical scenario presents an 86 year old female with numerous health issues and chronic illnesses. Mrs. Boswell’s advancing Alzheimer’s disease makes it extremely difficult to initiate dialysis, leading her physician to conclude a poor quality of life. The ethical dilemma portrayed in this case is between nonmaleficence and autonomy. Health care workers should focus on promoting the patient’s overall wellbeing and weigh the benefits and risks of the course of action, while also considering what the family declares they want done. Since the patient is deemed unable to make decisions, the goal is to collaborate with family, assess patient quality of life, address prognosis, and establish realistic care goals.

The ethical committee should intervene to determine the ethical responsibilities of the medical and administrative staff. The people involved should be held accountable and give them the opportunity to communicate the patients about the medical

We do agreed there is a dilemma in this case. As the chairman of the ethics committee, I found that the dilemma here is that both the patient as well as the hospital staff are right in their view. A person has the right to choose to die however we cannot make a physician carry out the process. With my understanding, we are all on the same agreement and have been informed with all the information about this dilemma. Dr. Vijay has informed that removing Margie’s pacemaker would violate the ethics principles of justice, beneficence, and non-maleficence. If he followed through with Margie’s request, he would be going against helping others, avoiding or causing damage to patients, and disregarding the risks and benefits of Margie by performing the requested actions. Jane Robison has expressed that doing what Margie has requested would not be good for Margie nor her profession due to the ethics standards that are withheld for all the patients. She believes that with

Some 400,000 Americans die annually from abnormally fast or irregular heart rhythm, FDA said in announcing approval of the pacemaker device in February 1993. Since this approval, thousands of Americans suffering from irregular heart rhythm are able to live a healthy and happy life thanks to this invention. Because of this small device, symptoms are relieved, lives are longer, and people are able to live life to the fullest. “It’s a big breakthrough,” said David B. Delurgio, an Emory University cardiologist. “It’s not for every heart-failure patient, but a proportion could definitely benefit” (Neergaard). Pacemakers have impacted many important aspects of society including the ability to contribute in the workplace, benefits in the economy of

The reality of my situation is very serious and my wish is that future patients be given more information so they can make an informed decision when choosing whether or not to accept a pacemaker or CRT-D device.

The ethical issue at hand, is how the patient of a nursing home, her family and the nursing home

Ethical dilemmas surface daily in professional nursing practice. Whether you work in acute care, long-term care, hospice care, ambulatory care, managed care, or public health care chances are you will be responsible for making decisions in a situation of ethical concern. The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the ethical issues presented in the Ethics Game simulation, the decision-making process used to determine the solution to the dilemma, and apply concepts from the Ethical Lenses to my work place.

A seventy-year-old women with a damaged mitral valve in her heart undergoes a risky surgery after her cardiac failure incident. The doctor does all he can do to assist her with the best of his abilities but the surgery did not go as expected. Then an experimental cardiac assist device was implanted in her chest. Again, the same issue replayed and the patient wakes up but unresponsive due to the constant inadequate blood flow from her heart. At this point she feels excruciating pain, the doctor and staff agreed she would not survive. The doctor remained in the hospital over the course of the events for over twenty hours and receives consent from his patient’s family to put her on morphine to relieve her pain. He observes that she is still in

According to the Anthem Medical Policy regarding Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) (Policy SURG.00033, Current Effective Date October 6, 2015, Last Review Date August 6, 2015), ICD pacemaker is medically necessary in patients receiving optimal medical therapy and have a Reasonable expectation of survival with a good functional status for more than 1 year and one (1) of the following indications: After evaluation to define the cause of the event and to exclude any completely reversible causes in survivors of cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation (VF) or hemodynamically unstable sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT); or Those with structural heart disease and spontaneous sustained VT, whether hemodynamically stable or unstable;

The concept of non-invasive cardiac pacing has been present for about 200 years. In 1791 Galvani reported that an electrical current applied across the heart of a dead frog resulted in myocardial contraction [1]. However, non-invasive pacing was not made practical until Dr. Paul Zoll's work in the early 1950s. In 1952 Zoll reported the successful delivery of current from a generator through subcutaneous needle electrodes, which resulted in fixed rate pacing of two patients with ventricular standstill.3 He later reported the development and successful use of the first true noninvasive pacemaker and monitor. This device used a pair of 3-centimeter diameter metal electrodes secured to the chest wall with a leather belt and delivered 2-20 millisecond,

In an effort to improve quality of life, technological advances have created ethical and moral challenges for the healthcare team, patients and their families when end of life is near. However, these advances also shape the dying process and can impact where and how one dies (ACHE, 2014). Advances, automated implantable cardioverter defibrillators (AICDs) were introduced in the 1980s and nearly 3 million people in the United States currently use this therapy (Gura, 2015). AICDs have increased survival rate and improved quality of life for patients suffering from life threatening ventricular arrhythmias and are now considered the first line defense in patients with left ventricular dysfunction (Gura,

A patient’s ability to reason and make informed decisions can make a physician’s job rather challenging because it can conflict with a person’s ethics ideals. The main components that define a patient’s competence are their ability to understand crucial information and make and communicate their decisions. There have been several instances that physicians have struggled to decide wether or not it is their duty to uphold this standard. This is especially true when it comes to cases where core values are confronted such physician assisted suicide or taking a person off life support. All of these instances contribute to the physician-patient relationship, which can be difficult to clarify but are essential to health care and

devices have also been invented to help patient’s during their wait for a new heart. Nevertheless,

In this age of advanced technology where standards of living and health care delivery are constantly evolving, it is vital that health care workers not only exercise and practice the technical aspect of their profession, but also have a clear and concise approach to often ambiguous ethical challenges. According to Concordia University (2017), bioethics has a wide range of applications; from birth to the end of life, directly affecting both patients and care providers, impacting human community from the local nursing home to the huge international conferences on a myriad of issues, some of which are discussed in this paper. This paper is in two parts, first of which discusses an article on blood transfusion, which is a major ethical issue. The second part of the paper examines ethically uncertain situation in which the nurse is faced with a decision and action focused problems. Through the application of appropriate guidelines, including the moral and ethical principles, the American Nursing Association (ANA) code of ethics for nurses, and literature review, discusses how the scenarios presented should be appropriately resolved.

In “When Life is a Fate Worse than Death,” Haider Javed Warraich argues that the issue of patients’ right to die is complicated by the sometimes conflicting interests of patients and physicians. The most important ethical dilemma in this article is that which of the two, patient’s desire or doctor’s expertise, should carry more weight to the use of life support, which can save life or prolong a painful death. Doctors are trained to do no harm; they seek to heal, not to terminate life. Further complicating matters is the issue of liability. Even if a doctor agrees with the patient’s choice to end his or her life, the doctor may be hesitant for fear of legal repercussions. Those several issues can result in patients, the major stakeholders, stuck on an unwanted life support, technically alive but with little sense of “dignity.” And yet for patients, too, the matter is complicated, for they may feel ambivalent about ending their own lives. In order to avoid such murky uncertainty, each state should establish guidelines that involve structured dialogue between doctors and patients and take both sides into account.