The Ethical And Legal Considerations

Besides, if a person lacks mental capacity to give valid consent, nurses caring for such a person should be involved in assessing the treatment to be administered. However, they must be “aware of the legislation regarding mental capacity, ensuring that people who lack capacity remain at the centre of decision making and are fully safeguarded.”6 The Mental Capacity Act (2005) offers assistance regarding ‘capacity’. The Act applies to all aged 16 and above and to those with learning disability, dementia, brain injury, autism and mental health issues.

Shadow charts were developed to gather data and information for additional departments and medical personnel that need access to part of a patient’s file or records. The original records should always remain in the patient’s primary chart allow copies may be available to ancillary departments that may need access to the information. The same level of confidentiality and security applies to the shadow charts. They must be in a secure location with access by authorized personnel only. Additional information that should be included in shadow charts is a formal recording process to document those who access the information. Furthermore, a consistent system of upgrading the

The Doctor and Patient relationship aspect of Medicine has changed drastically in the last twenty years. It has evolved from paternalism (the doctor makes the decision for the patient) to shared decision making where the patient is considered an equal partner in his/her own health related decisions. Informed consent is the cornerstone for this view. When a patient or a research subject makes an autonomous decision after understanding, the risks and benefits involved with the decision is Informed consent. Complete Informed consent covers the following components: competency, disclosure, comprehension and voluntary. Competency refers to the requirement for the individual to be of legal age and be mentally competent to understand the process.

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

The two major ethical considerations that are important to address are 9.02 - Use of Assessments and 9.06 - Interpreting Assessment Results. 9.02 - Use of Assessments is particularly important because the psychologist must consider the individual’s language preference and competence. As was noted in the initial case description, Brandon’s parents are both Polish immigrants, and Brandon spoke Polish in home until he attended junior kindergarten. Although he may not have an accent, his language preference should be noted as English may not be the language he is more comfortable using. 9.06 - Interpreting Assessment Results should also be considered. Brandon’s test-taking abilities should be highlighted, as he is suspicious and ambivalent towards the psychological testing. These feelings may negatively affect his test scores, as he may try to either hide how he truly feels, or lie to make himself seem better or worse. It should also be noted that there could be other client characteristics that affect his scores as well, particularly cultural factors.

Patient informed consent refers to the situation where the patient is fully informed on the consequences of their health care decision after which the patient gives the decision. For there to be informed consent, there are five elements that must be discussed. The first is the nature of the patient's decision then the applicable alternatives to the proposed intervention. Third are the risks, benefits and uncertainties associated with each of the alternatives. Fourth is the assessment of the patient's understanding and last is the acceptance of the intervention or an alternative by the patient. Before the patient's consent is considered to be valid, the patient's competency to make the decision must be addressed. The criteria for evaluating the patient's competency is clearly stated in section 3 of the 2005 Mental Capacity Act which states that provided the person is able to understand, retain and use information provided and to communicate their decision in any way such as talking or sign language, they are competent to make a decision. If a patient is treated against their refusal to consent, it amounts to the tort of battery or can also be considered the crime of assault. In addition to this, laws that touch on human rights reinforce the importance of the protection of the physical integrity of the individual in terms of their right to respect of their private life. Therefore, refusal of medical treatment is a human right.

In current times, children are not getting infected with diseases in order to find curative vaccines, but they are being made part of clinical trials for studies of genetic screening, the enrollment of healthy children in studies of sibling bone marrow donation, and the use of hypothermia for neonates with asphyxia (Laventhal, Tarini & Lantos, 2012). These trial studies have become ethical dilemmas in pediatrics for various reasons, people believe that there are not strong enough regulations for these trials and also that children are not given the opportunity to make their own decisions, most of the time, because children are underage, parents are the ones who make the decision of making their children part of these studies. Current regulations for pediatric clinical trials only require the consent of one parent, unless they are high level risk trials, in which case both parents needs to give approval and the child must also assent. The issue of children given assent for high risk trials is controversial because how do we know that the children really understand the risks that are associated with the trials, do they fully understand that they could possibly get hurt and sometimes their lives can be in danger.

Every patient has a right to decide on their own course of treatment and freely consent to that treatment. In order to make an educated decision they must be provided with the proper information to make an informed choice (Opinion 8.08 - Informed Consent, 2006). It is the physician’s legal and ethical obligation to provide this information when making their recommendation on treatment. The choices given must be in accordance with good medical practice (Opinion 8.08 - Informed Consent, 2006). The informed consent is the legal policy, either written or verbal, that gives full disclosure of all the information including potential risks that is applicable to the patient’s condition and treatment being offered (Kazmier, 2008).

(3) "Competent" means that, in the opinion of a court or in the opinion of the patient's attending physician or consulting physician, psychiatrist, or psychologist, a patient has the ability to make and communicate an informed decision to health care providers, including communication through persons familiar with the patient's manner of communicating if those persons are available.

Dimond (2009) and NHS choices (2016) explained consent as the process involving a person giving their approval to accept or refuse a treatment or interventions, after receiving detailed information from a health care professional about the risk or benefits of the procedure. In order for consent to be deemed valid, it needs to be given voluntarily without any influence or pressure from either a family member or clinician. In addition, the capacity of the person is important when giving consent and the ability to process the given information and make a decision. Tingle &Cribb (2014) agree, emphasizing that the autonomy of the person giving

Consent for medical treatment is based on three legal ideals: the patient must be informed to make a decision, the patient cannot be intimidated into making a decision, and the patient must be competent (McCabe). In 1982, a study was held by Weithorn and Campbell showing the competency of four age groups (9,14,18, and 21 years-old) based on questions from the ideals aforementioned. The study concluded that fourteen year-olds’ competence and adult are analogous, while nine year-olds could partake in discussions based off of their treatment (Weithorn). The study conducted by Weithorn and Campbell, not only displays competence, but also the ability to comprehend the possible outcomes, and determine the importance of these possible outcomes relative to their own lives. With studies showing that at the age of fourteen the decisional capacity (prefrontal cortex) of the human brain is equal to that of an eighteen year-old, the legal age of consent must be lowered to fourteen years of age.

The healthcare professional has a legal responsibility to ensure that the patient understands the information being given, can evaluate the available choices and is making the decision voluntarily.

Within healthcare, practitioners often have to make difficult decisions regarding the care of their patients. This could be to do with giving or withdrawing treatment, or as simple as sharing risk information (Glover, 1997). Ultimately, the practitioner must be able to rationalise any decision they have made (Morrison, 2009). With this in mind, the following assignment will draw upon an ethical dilemma and explore how theoretical perspectives can be utilised within the decision making process. Therefore it will also be pertinent to draw upon the law, and how this influences actions within health care. To facilitate this discussion, I will identify a scenario from practice that

The first step of the Ethical Decision-Making Procedure is stated as, “1.0 Become Aware of Dilemma” (McNamara). According to the given case scenario, the dilemma is clearly stated. It reads that the client (mother) does not believe in rewards or support the use of them for her son. The mother is going against what the BCBA believes in and stands for, thus causing a direct dilemma. Removing reinforcers is not feasible for the professional BCBA, and this must be properly addressed with the client. Situations like these are where the Ethical Compliance Code comes into place for the sake of the clients and professionals involved.

There will be many scenarios that can challenge a counselor. However, when there are specific cases that involve harm to the clients’ person or another a counselor must follow the processes outlined in the bylaws of the American School Counselor Association. These outlined processes serve two important purposes, the purpose of protecting the client and the purpose of protecting the counselor. This paper will answer questions in response to the scenario of Angela.