Religious and Medical Dilemma Essay

One of the major areas of strength of the AMA Code of Ethics is the principle that outlines that the physician must “regard responsibility to the patient as paramount” (American Medical Association, n.d., par. 9). This principle outlines that importance of putting the patient first in all care aspects when working with a patient. Along with this, other principles set forth in the AMA Code of Ethics, while involving other aspects of care, state that the rights of the patient shall be acknowledged and followed during patient care. It is very important that healthcare codes of ethics are clear in defining that the patient needs to be considered first and foremost.

The two ethical dilemmas that stick out to me in the case are patient autonomy, and distributive justice. Patient autonomy is the patient’s right to make decisions about their care, including whether to accept or decline treatment (Taylor, 2014). Because the patient did not fully understand the information relayed in the consent form or the procedure, her patient autonomy may have been violated. This also may mean the consent form may not be valid. A signed consent form from a patient affords the hospital with an assumed duty to care for that patient (as cited Taylor, 2014). And the patient has given the medical professional permission to provide treatment. Therefore, it is important that the patient fully understands and can communicate that understanding when consenting to

In taking care of a patient, it is important for nurses to respect the patient, their beliefs, and their right to autonomy. Provision One in the Code of Ethics states “the nurse practices with compassion and respect for inherent dignity, worth, and unique attributes of every person” (ANA, 2015, p. 7). With a Jehovah’s Witness patient, the nurse must first acquire information regarding their religion and how it may impact their care and their wishes related to their healthcare. Once their patient’s beliefs are noted and understood, the nurse must establish a professional and therapeutic relationship with their patient without bias to their religion and the associated beliefs. The duty to act without bias can be found outlined in Provision 1.2 (ANA, 2015).

If a Jehovah witness comes into the hospital in need of a blood transfusion the doctors and nurses must respect the patient’s wishes not to have a blood transfusion.

A lot of people are unfamiliar with Jehovah’s Witnesses (J.W.) population and their religious believes. As stated in the Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia, J.W., Christian sect, founded in 1872 in Pittsburgh, Pa., by the American clergyman Charles Taze Russell, with congregations throughout the world. The legal governing body of J. W. is the Watch Tower Bible (Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia, 2014). After researching the values and beliefs of J.W. and comparing them to Christianity, Professor Watson found quite a few differences (Walston, R., 2004). One of the major differentiating characteristics of J. W. is their refusal to accept blood transfusions because it is considered to be a sin. Members of this sect refuse blood mainly based on the Book of Acts that says to abstain from blood. They see blood as

Jehovah's witnesses’ faith allows them to seek medical help; however, they do not accept blood transfusions. This belief arises from a biblical passage that states "Only flesh with its soul- its blood-you must not eat (Genesis 9:3-4), "You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood. I will set my face against that person who eats blood...Anyone eating it will be cut off” (Leviticus 17:10, 13-14). These passages are interpreted by Jehovah's witnesses as forbidding the transfusion of any blood products. The following presentation will address legal and ethical issues that can arise from this scenario.

Ethics is an issue that is involved here. It is often argued that physician assisted may be a

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

Allowing someone to die: Some religious affiliations (Jehovah’s witness) will not receive a blood transfusion. They have decided not to take advantage of medical technology to preserve life. If such person is in a life & death situation and required a blood transfusion in order to survive the choose to die vs. receiving a blood transfusion.

Notably, Jehovah Witness patients’ religious teachings prohibit their believers from Blood transfusion, euthanasia, autopsy and Artificial insemination. These medical practices are against the Biblical teachings of the Jehovah Witness since they consider them to be unholy. Further, they believe the medical interventions to interfere with God’s intentions for human life hence they disallow their followers from practicing

For many people Christianity is the religion of choice and a way of life. Jehovah?s Witnesses are one subgroup of the Christian faith. The JW religion was founded in 1872 by Charles Taze Russell. They comprise 1.2 million of the U.S. population (Campbell, Y., Machan M., & Fisher, M., 2016). They present a unique challenge to the medical community because of their stance on blood transfusions. Part I will provide a

In the case where the patient makes their strong religious beliefs verbal to the healthcare provider they have an obligation to make certain there is no documented religious preference in their previous records or if the patient has a Living Will on file. The recent admission documentation may have been entered incorrectly or the patients religious preference many have not been transcribed. If this was my patient and he expressed his strong objections to a blood transfusion. I would have documented this and brought this to the attention of his doctor prior to the procedure. Also, I would exhaust every avenue to insure that this patient had no documents on file. The healthcare provider should feel an obligation to check all prior admission documentation available in unique situations. I believe this is incumbent that personnel make the best choice possible in sensitive cases. Also, contacting the patient’s primary care physician may offer some missed documentation concerning the patient’s religious preference. If no religious preference past or present has been documented. I would ethically have a problem with the blood transfusion based on my conversation with the

Even though everyone seemed to agree and felt the same way about the situation, it was difficult to rationalize or logically defend what we felt was the right thing to do, which would involve breaking patient confidentiality. Some of the principles that we thought could be used to defend our position were beneficence, non-maleficence, and utilitarianism. Going back to the Dr. Pellegrino’s article, the population-based ethics, in which the physician takes the role of a social servant for the good of the society, could also be used to defend our position. This discussion served as a motivation to not just learn the ethical principles, but also to become more knowledgeable in how to apply the ethical principles to different situations. It also encouraged me to develop the virtue of prudence in order to be prepared for the tricky situations that may arise in clinical

saith the Lord that made thee, and formed thee from the womb . . .’

To be moral simply means to do what is right; however, doing what is right is easier said than done. Perhaps if one was a child, one would, to the best of their abilities, follow what his parents demand of him, this would constitute them as doing what is right. Now let us say that the child is an orphan, or does not believe what his parents say is right, should following them still be considered moral, or is it even up to him to decide? Perhaps the child has evolved past parenting all together and therefore needs no more guidance. Defining what is considered moral has now become much more complex. Sam Harris presents the same basic argument of morality in his book Letter to a Christian Nation, by applying it not to a child and his parents,