Making Medical Decisions

Autonomy refers to an individual’s right to self- rule or governs one’s self (Beauchamp Childress, 2009). Autonomy is refer to the individual right to make his or her own decision regarding their health care needs. This is respected in the health care setting.

Autonomy includes three primary conditions: (1) liberty (independence from controlling influences), (2) agency (capacity for intentional action), and (3) understanding (through informed consent) (Beauchamp & Childress, 2009, p. 100). According to Beauchamp & Childress (2009) to respect autonomous agents, one must acknowledge their right to hold views, to make choices, and to take actions based on their personal values and beliefs (p. 103). Respect for autonomy implies thaturges caregivers to respect theassist a patient in achieving? Heed? the autonomous choices of their patients. From there, patients can act intentionally and with full understanding when evaluating medical treatment modalities. Autonomy also includes a set of rules, one of which requires that providers honor patient decision-making rights by providing the truth, also known as veracity (Beauchamp & Childress, 2009, p. 103). In this case, several facets of the principle of respecting autonomy, specifically veracity, informed

Autonomy is the right to make decisions for oneself and have those decisions be respected by others. This allows patients to have full knowledge and power of treatments and procedures being done to them. Along with having complete knowledge of what is going on medically with the patient, this principle enforces one to tell their patient any and all risks, benefits and alternatives to what is being suggested. This principle also allows patients to have the right to refuse treatment whenever they choose. Autonomy is one of the four main ethical principles that used when making decisions. The movie Miss Evers Boys shows numerous examples of how this very important principal was violated and swept under the

Why would this be the case? By offering a patient the decision to have a procedure or treatment done to them or not, you are honoring their autonomy, simply by giving them a choice. Though in this case, they are in no sense informed and cannot make a choice based on their best interests. However, by allowing the patient to be informed about the various benefits, risks, and outcomes from the particular treatment or treatments, they can more accurately determine the course of action that best fits with their

Over the last several decades there have been dramatic developments in Western medical ethics. The form of bioethics now widely adhered to in the United States is 'principlism', an approach originally advocated by the American philosophers Beauchamp and Childress. Principlism argues that in medico-ethical dilemmas, including end of life healthcare situations, ethical principles must be applied (Kessel & Meran, 1998). The following ethical principles are related to advance directives: respect for autonomy (self-determination), non-maleficence (not inflicting harm), beneficence (doing good), and justice (some concept of fairness) (Kessel & Meran, 1998). The leading principle, Autonomy, is the fundamental standard that safeguards a patient the liberty to choose and to govern what happens to their person, in so far as those choices do not harm others. “Autonomy implies that people have an inherent right to make treatment decisions and should be active participants in their own care.” (Kessel

As a result, this challenges the ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence and nonmaleficence. At some point in our lives, we will be a patient in one way or another. As patients, we have the legal right to decide what’s in our best interest when it comes to the management of our health. The concept of autonomy is centered on the idea of self-governance. This means that patients have the right to play an active role in their treatment and medical care plan and have the right to receive or refuse treatment, the right to confidentiality, the right to select a healthcare proxy and the right for informed consent.

The patient-provider relationship is at the core of medical ethics and along with it are three major models that determine the medical decision making of each provider. The three models are the paternalistic model, the autonomy model and the deliberative model. The paternalistic model is defined as a patient-provider relationship model that involves the provider's professional knowledge to decide what is best for the patient. The paternalistic model denies the patients right to autonomy and the provider acts as the patient's guardian. The autonomy model is defined as a patient-provider relationship model that gives the patient their full autonomy in deciding what treatment to choose.

The primary issues presented in this case are related to the cultural as well as the religious factors affecting the medical decision making as well as disease management. This involves Rivka Cohen, who is a six-year-old girl diagnosed with cystic fibrosis (CF). Rivka and her family live in a tight knit Hasidic Jewish community where daily life is built on ancient laws and religious devotion. The Cohen family have acknowledged that their daughter requires treatment for her medical condition, but are struggling to find a compromise between their religious and cultural beliefs and the cf treatment team’s recommendations. The Cohen’s medical decision making and disease management is heavy influenced by their cultural and religious beliefs in conjunction with input from their rabbi. At the present time, the CF treatment team has established a treatment plan, but the Cohens are having a difficult time adhering to this plan due to several factor that will be discussed.

Autonomy stresses that everyone has the right to decide what happens to his or her own body. This legal right requires that doctors must receive consent prior to treating a patient. Doctors must

If a person makes a voluntary request for medial aid in dying, and have been fully informed of their condition and all of the other options, then a doctor who willingly will help the patient in dying would not be compromising the patient’s autonomy. Physician-assisted suicide respects the free will of the

In medical ethics, there is a strong value placed upon patient autonomy and the role it ought to have within the healthcare profession. Autonomy can be defined as a means of self-governance and self-determination when making decisions about oneself (Varelius, 2006). An autonomous person believes they are in the best position to determine what is good or bad for themselves (Summer, 1996). However, the interpretation of autonomy by the patient is a controversial topic within philosophy and the health care field. Advocates for absolute patient autonomy believe it has value "over and beyond its instrumental value in enhancing patients wellbeing" (Varelius, 2006). This means that a patient believes that their autonomy is the most important

The Principle of Autonomy states that patients should have the dignity to be able to make decisions when it comes to their own treatment. (Taking Sides, p. 176). A physician must receive informed consent from their patient before they can move forward with any treatment plan. The Principle of Autonomy also goes on to say that if a doctor were to treat a patient without their consent, they would be treating the patients like an object instead of a human being. If a patient is unable to speak for him or herself then the doctor must perform actions that would be in the patient’s best interest, since the patient cannot make these decisions. (Taking Sides, p.176). Another ethical principle that can be discussed when talking about physician assisted suicide is the Principle of Nonmaleficence. The principle ensures that doctors avoid doing anything that may expose a patient to needless harm. Although this principle states that the physician cannot do anything harmful to the patient, there are certain treatments that can cause harm to patients, for example, surgery. This principle rules out any non-beneficial procedure

In this case, the most ethical approach would be involving family members or their guardians. The best interest principle requires the decision maker to apply their own knowledge, values, and expertise to make the decision on behalf of the patient. The decision in this case is made with the patient’s best interest at heart. On the other hand, the principle of substituted judgment, the decision maker attempts to make the decision based on the known preferences and values of the patient. The healthcare administrator is required to assess the situation and recommend the best decision making

I believe that a person should have the independence and freedom to decide their fate, as long as it doesn’t cause harm on others such as family, friends, and the doctors involved. Because of the rapid and dramatic developments in medicine and technology in today’s society, it has given us the power to to save more lives, yet prolong the death of the patients whose physical and mental capabilities cannot be

There are times that self-determination has opposition with the values and beliefs of health care providers. The five step ethical decision making model is in place for patients that are unable to make their own health care decisions due to incompetency; paternalism is not the method used anymore. “In relation to health care, paternalism manifests itself in the making of decisions on behalf of patients without their full consent or knowledge. (Burkhardt & Nathaniel, 2008). Value systems, which includes a patients and family morals, play a factor in ethical decision making.