The Dilemma Of Children With Critical Condition

Autonomy can override beneficence when life-support is withdrawn (Prozgar, 2010). In addition, when a physician takes the position of withdrawing life-supporting equipment, the principle of non-maleficence is severed. Since helping patients die violates the physician’s virtue of duty to save lives,” distributed justice is served by releasing a room in the intensive care unit for a patient who has a higher chance of resolving their medical problems (Pozgar, G. 2010). There are so many inflict fuzzy gray areas and ideas about conflicting DNR policies that political disputes had to go to the courts to sort out the issues legally.

Nurses rely on personal knowledge and their professional skills to provide ethical care (Creasia & Friberg, 2011). In everyday practice, nurses must balance the needs of their patients against those of the organization, society and themselves. They strive to deliver the highest level of care for patients, but adjusting for limited organizational and personal resources often requires difficult decisions. This paper explores the following scenario suggested by Maville and Huerta: “You are a nurse providing home care to a mother, and you suspect child abuse after observing the mother’s reaction to her child” (as cited by Arizona State University, 2014). When faced with a moral dilemma, a competent nurse incorporates ethical, bioethical and legal considerations. In the proposed story, incorporating the nursing ethics of advocacy, beneficence, nonmaleficence and collaboration will guide the nurse towards an appropriate and legal course of action.

Moreover, an emphasis is imposed on the rights of a single patient to commit an act or decision even though it is in contrast with the views of the others. In regards to the ethical dilemma, a nurse could not justify the morality of the two possible choices based on their results and consequences. The Deontological approach would encourage the health care staff as well as the patient to ask themselves the most righteous choice for their situation. With this in mind, a combination of ethical theories can also be employed to give light to the dilemma. In view of this, another ethical approach could be applied to solve the issue, and this is the Right-based approach. This theory also aim to promote the rights of every person, and that, they are indispensable just to make ends meet. However, not all ethical theories can be incorporated in every dilemma in a health care setting because their foundations would contradict one another. In order to provide an effective and efficient solution, nurses should be knowledgeable of the principles enveloping each of the ethical theories and should be wise to apply them in appropriate issues and

The case of Baby Boy Doe is an ethical dilemma because it’s an occurrence where “decision makers are drawn in two directions by competing course of acting that are based of differing moral frameworks, varying or inconsistent elements of the organizations philosophy, conflicting duties or moral principles, or an ill-defined sense of right and wrong.” (Darr, K. 2011) There were many differing viewpoints as well as moral and ethical choices on this case, the parents, nurses, physicians and hospital as an organization. In regards to the respect for person’s principle, the hospital and physicians allowed the parents to be completely autonomous. The parents were given the

Today many nurses, doctors, and other health care professionals encounter ethical dilemmas on a daily basis. An ethical dilemma can be defined as when there is more than one reasonable solution to a specific scenario. No one solution is more right than the other. In fact, they may both feel wrong, but a decision must be made (Butts & Rich, 2016). In the healthcare setting, nurses should be prepared to think critically and make ethical decisions. There are many factors that contribute to the process of ethical decision making such as ethical perspectives, principles, theories, and guidelines. Ethical decision making is to be rational and systematic. The selected case to be discussed is the case of Jahi McMath,

Nurses are faced with ethical dilemmas on a daily basis, each situation being unique and requiring the nurse to set aside their own values and beliefs in order to properly care for their patients. Situations requiring nurses to make an ethical decision are diverse and dynamic; the values set out by the College of Nurses of Ontario code of ethics remains the same. Therefore, all decision based on these vales regardless of the setting and circumstances ensure consistent solutions. The scenario involves a woman who was admitted to the NICU due to complications during her sixth month of pregnancy. The patient indicated that no extraordinary measures should be made to save her baby; she became further detached when the baby developed a bleed

The ethical principles for nurses to practice with beneficence and no maleficence. This legal battle between Terri Schiavo’s husband and her family was an ethical debate between continuing artificial life or remove her feeding tube by the request of her husband. Using the theories of utilitarianism and deontology can be applied or considered in making the most ethically correct resolution. The cases are very complex and raise many moral and ethical issues. The cases have brought awareness to society of “the importance of discussing end-of-life issues with family members and underscores how an advance directive, a living will and/or durable power of attorney for health care, are a healthcare proxy clarifies and provides evidence of the wishes of an individual regarding end-of-life decisions. Terri Schiavo should impress upon laypersons and professionals alike the uncertainty of the context in which issues of continuation and termination are argued ethically. Nobody knows what Mrs. Schiavo would have wanted. She left no advance directive and in its absence her husband says one thing and her parents

There are some ethical dilemmas evident in this scenario, starting with an End of life dilemma, refusal of care and informed consent.“End of

As noted by Edge & Groves (2006), “obligation is grounded not in the nature of man or in the circumstances of the world but in pure reason” (p. 38). Although he may not feel that it is the correct choice, it was definitely not a place where his personal views could interject his duty as a judge. His decision was absolutely necessary to prevent McMaster Children’s hospital and the Children’s Aid Society to intervene on the parent’s autonomy. Although in knowing that traditional methods of healing treatment for the young child would lead to her demise, the judge has to respect the parent’s decision in the

There are complex religious, moral, ethical and legal aspects associated with placing a DNR order. Most of the religions agree that God alone has the right to initiate and terminate life. But is it morally right to resuscitate someone who is at the end stage of life to survive a poor quality of life? When it comes to ethics as a health care providers are we following the principle of do no harm? is cardio pulmonary resuscitation always beneficial for the patient? More, if choices are to live with morbidity or to die with dignity you have to do what’s good for the patient. Lastly patient has the right to make decision about their own health, therefore respecting their wish to die is only fair.

Healthcare professionals will be faced with ethical dilemmas throughout their career, particularly in the hospital environment. Having an education regarding professional healthcare ethics will provide some direction in how to best address these dilemmas at a time when either the patient or their family is in need of making decisions for themselves or their family member. It can be difficult for healthcare professionals to weigh professional protocol against their own personal beliefs and ethical understandings when determining critical care for their patient.

In end-of-life scenarios, where the patient may not be able to communicate their wishes, decisions must be made either by the healthcare professional(s) or family member(s). However, who gets to decide or where the line should be drawn are not always clear. Consequently, not all decisions may be ethically permissible. To illustrate, I will discuss a scenario in which physicians and family are not in agreement. Upon proving a brief summary and explaining the ethical dilemma, I will provide moral reasons for two ethically permissible choices from which, by referencing the principle of autonomy and Utilitarianism, will determine which course of action ought to be carried out.

An example is infants with oxygen deprivation, brain or organ damage (Blendon 2659). The third protocol handled infants with hopeless prognosis who according to their doctors and physicians were unbearably suffering. Many people argued that the infants would not give an informed consent therefore there is a need to adopt other alternative methods that do not involve euthanasia. Children, unlike adults, lack experience and do not have grounds on which they would support their euthanizing. Some scholars even state that physician assisted suicide is an acceptable alternative for ill adults but not for infants or children. Infants might not be able to choose between unbearable pain and death. However, their parents act as custodians of their decision making, and thus make such decisions for

When researching this case study, the relevant ethical principles that apply to this case study are autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply. Autonomy, according to Oxford Dictionary, “Is the right or condition of self-government, especially in a particular sphere.” The medical team respected the patient’s and her husband’s decisions based on their values and beliefs. The principle of benefice, “which centers on promoting the well-being of others,” was used to determine the fate of the patient and her child. The well-being of the woman and her child, was spiritually in this case. Another ethical principle that was involved in this case was the principle of nonmalefiencene, which is “not intentionally inflicting harm on the patient

The best possible resolution for this case would be to, first, to identify what Andrea would want to do for her end of life care. When her condition was deteriorating but before the cardiac arrest, the parents, social workers, nurses, and the physician should assess Andrea’s pain and suffering, asking her to express what she thinks she would want in the end. Harrison et al. (1997) supports this argument, claiming, “Parents and physicians should not exclude children and adolescents from decision making without persuasive reasons.” “Physicians should ensure that good decisions are made on behalf of their child patients” (as in Boetzkes & Waluchow, 2000, p. 163). It was also argued that, children of primary-school age, like Andrea, can participate in medical decisions, indicating their