Law And Bioethics Paper

The Superior Court of Los Angeles County became a pivotal case in a patient’s right to refuse treatment. In the initial case Ms. Bouvia and her legal team sought a court order to have the NGT removed and to stop all medical treatments she did not consent to. She argued that this treatment would not be a cure for her condition and would not improve her quality of life. The hospital staff argued the interest of the state prevailed over a patient’s right to refuse treatment. They noted that the state and healthcare teams viable interests include: “(1) preserving life, (2) preventing suicide, (3) protecting innocent third parties, and (4) maintaining the ethical standards of the medical profession, including supporting the right of physicians to effectively render necessary and appropriate medical services” (Liang & Lin, 2005). Additionally they sighted Ms. Bouvia’s failed previous attempt to “starve herself to death” in 1983 with the assistance of her medical team. The court denied her request citing these key interests and the fact that medical professionals felt that Ms. Bouvia could live 15-20 additional years with supplemental nutrition justified the state’s interest in preserving her life. The court also stated that any other decision would be condoning a medical team to aid and abet suicide.

As stated in Joseph A. Carrese’s article “Refusal of Care: Patient’s Well-Being and Physicians’ Ethical Obligations,” introduces the fundamental principles and responsibilities that physicians have in order to preserve the welfare of their patients in any circumstances. On the other hand, Debbie Dempsey, author of “Refusing Treatment: Practical, Legal, and Ethical Issues,” strongly supports the patient’s right to make their own medical choices, whether it be to accept or decline any help. W.D Ross solidifies the dependent yet incompetent patient to not refuse care and treatment because the physician has a duty of fidelity, beneficence and a duty to

The dilemma for ethics committees brought up by the story of Patrick is a question of how much is too much. As technologies in the medical field continue to advance, people can live substantially longer lives, but are they lives worth living? Some people, like Patrick, don’t think being paralyzed is a quality of life worth living. Others, like Armando, refuse to be made DNR and cling to life even if it consists of communicating by blinking of the eye. The questions raised in this book are awful decisions that nobody should ever have to make. Whatever the committees and doctors choose to do can keep patients alive and allow them to have a low quality of live, be in constant pain and be a burden to society, or keep a terminally ill patient comfortable until he or she has said their good-byes and let nature take its course.

The role of ethics and social responsibility aids organizations in developing a strong strategic plan, while addressing the needs of stakeholders. Ethics and social responsibility require social awareness to address the needs of the environment and to increase the knowledge of employees, which will lead to a corporation focused on supplying the customer with what is needed, managers equipped with solid decision-making abilities, and employees who believe that he or she are an asset to the business. It is the executive manager’s responsibility to establish a clear vision for the corporation and place a specific focus on understanding stakeholder’s needs. In an effort to support

This research paper is being submitted on March 3th, 2013, for Milo Sampson’s M230/HSC2641 Section 04 - Medical Law and Ethics class.

De Bord, J. (2014). ETHICS IN MEDICINE University of Washington School of Medicine. Retrieved from https://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/consent.html

2) Limits: The Role of Law in Bioethical Decisionmaking, by Roger B. Dworkin (Indiana, 1996) & Strangers at the Bedside: A History of How Law and Bioethics Transformed the Practice of Medicine, by David J. Rothman (Harper-Collins, 1991). [These are available for background material.--on reserve at the Law Library & the Center for Bioethics]

Privacy Act 1988’s purpose is to standardize how personal information is collected, stored, used, disclosed and how this information is accessed. There’s 13 Australian Privacy Principals that relate to Government and Private sectors handling information. Stipulations for credit reporting, and health and medical research professions accessing and managing information when unable to seek consent.

Two exceptions to confidentiality in healthcare settings would be mental health patients and them presenting a serious threat to self or others. The Privacy Rule permits the care provider to disclose necessary patient information to law enforcement and family members. Another exception to confidentiality in a healthcare setting would

Every time health professionals claim to speak for the rights of others many questions arise within the bioethical community. Although altruism is a motivating mechanism of selfless care for others, it may have a dark side. Involuntary treatment for alcohol and drug abuse is a controversial tool used in medical care. The question of whether or not such treatment can be applied has been an unresolvable issue in bioethics for many years. Main ethical concerns often address questions of patient’s autonomy and health, doctor’s paternalism, and social wellbeing (Sjostrand and Helgesson 2008). The complex and multidimensional issue of

Undoubtedly, this had an impact on the school system. Timelines are strictly tracked to ensure compliance. According to DiNapoli and Bleiwas (2008), there are almost 170 different languages spoken in New York. This can make meeting timelines difficulty since children must be tested in their native language. Although it is imperative that students receive the education that they need it can be very difficult to meet timelines in certain

Authors Note: This paper is being submitted on the 18th of March 2013 for the winter semester of Medical Law and Ethics section 05.

Ethics, in medicine, is described as applying one’s morals and values to healthcare decisions (Fremgen 2012). It requires a critical-thinking approach that examines important considerations such as fairness for all patients, the impact of the decision on society and the future repercussions of the decision (Fremgen 2012). According to Fremgen (2012), bioethics concerns ethical issues discussed in the perspective of advanced medical technology. Goldman and Schafer (2012) state bioethical issues that arise in medical practice include antibiotics, dialysis, transplantation, intensive care units, issues of genetics, reproductive choices and termination of care. In clinical practice the most common issues revolve around informed consent, termination of life-sustaining treatments, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, and conflicts of interest (Goldman, Schafer 2012).

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

Written about the structure and culture of biomedical heath care and a society that is attempting to prolong aging, Medicare funding, funding and development of research, and today’s definition of standard care, Sharon Kaufman brings to light the many dilemmas posed to the American health care system. Her ethnographic story, Ordinary Medicine: Extraordinary Treatments, Longer Lives and Where to Draw the Line reveals the booming biomedical research and clinical trials industry, the power held by Medicare and private insurance, and a rapidly changing standard of care once a medical treatment is considered reimbursable. This leads to systematic changes in the standard of care result in a massive amount of pressure being placed upon doctors, patients and families to make an ethically and medically sound decision in refusing or accepting therapy. Kaufman exposes the driving forces behind the expansion of biomedicine, society’s response to the growing industry on a personal and bureaucratic level.