A practice commonly used in the medical field, “benevolent deception” is the act of physicians suppressing information about diagnoses in hopes of not causing patients emotional turmoil (Skloot 63). Benevolent deception is a contentious subject because when used, the bioethical principles of respect for autonomy and beneficence can conflict with each other. Respect for autonomy is the act of physicians acknowledging their patients’ abilities to make voluntary decisions on their own regarding their health care, while beneficence is the duty of doctors to help patients and remove harm from them (McCormick 4-5) When giving patients diagnoses, physicians are morally obliged to try to follow these doctrines, which is why some may mistakenly use …show more content…
However, doctors should not prioritize beneficence over respect for autonomy because of the importance of allowing a patient to have free will. According to Roger Higgs, it is considered in modern day society that an individual himself is assumed to be the best judge of his personal interests, and that it is a basic right to be able to make decisions pertaining to one’s own life—a right that “should not be taken away simply on the grounds of illness” (11). Respecting autonomy should be a priority because it preserves a patient’s right to know what is going on with their health and allows him or her to make personal decisions regarding its care. When a physician strictly follows the principle of beneficence instead of respect for autonomy, such as through lying to protect patients from emotional harm, the patients become unaware about the reality of their wellbeing. Without knowledge of the truth, this aforementioned right of freedom to make one’s own decisions is taken away from patients—how can one make a choice about their health when those choices are kept hidden? Overall, free will is a fundamental basic right that everyone is entitled to, not just in a medical context, but life as a whole. Every human being universally deserves to have the freedom to choose how to live their lives and make decisions regarding themselves without the influence of another individual.
Unfortunately, the basic human right to free will is
In his article “Whose Body Is It, Anyway?”—appearing in the New Yorker in October 1994—Dr. Atul Gawande highlights the complexities of the doctor-patient relationship vis-à-vis patient autonomy and decision-making. Dr. Gawande explains that a respect for patient autonomy (i.e., allowing patients to choose between courses of treatment, therefore directly influencing their health outcome) is the “new normal” for medical practitioners. However, Gawande also contends that there are times when patients are better served by a voluntary relinquishment of that autonomy.
According to Higgs, one reason why a medical profession might withhold the truth from the patient is that : it may actually do harm through anxiety and distress that's produced after disclosing the truth. At times, truth-telling can lead to major/acute distress or long term disability. There can also be times where distress and fear can lead to a more severe condition of an illness or even causing a patient to deny the treatment. In either way, there is a high chance that the worsening of the illness may occur after a physician disclosing the truth to his/her
The concept of autonomy in the medical practice brings many different views. Autonomy is the ability individuals have to be self-governing. In these different views there exist two schools of thought, one is the belief that people are born with the ability to do what they want their body and no organization can tell them what to do with their body, like the government. On the other hand, some people believe that it is more complicated and conditional on mental competency so that person can make rational decisions. However, the majority of people seem to advocate for autonomy. A particular largely uncontroversial discussion arises with the case of Dax Cowart, who had his right to autonomy taken from him in a tragic accident and is
A benevolent lie is when someone tells a lie, but not with the intentions of harming anyone in the process but to help the person to whom it is told. This type of lie is better known as the harmless little white lie. After reading chapter three I have concluded that to many unconscious benevolent lies are told at my house. Learning about this topic pointed out how often it happens without notice, for example my little girl just lost her front teeth and asked me if she will look pretty for her school pictures. My reply was “You’re going to be the most beautiful girl in the world!” Which she is beautiful to me no matter what but not to the world. I have told her the tooth fairy is real leaving money under her pillow in exchange for each tooth she loses. Also guilt for the story about Santa and how he gives presents when she’s been good or no presents if she’s been bad that year. This benevolent lie is to benefit me I guess to threaten her when she misbehaves. Another example is my second born goes around saying she is my favorite child so, I just agree that she is my favorite child but not to tell her sisters so their feeling won’t get hurt. They’re all my favorite in their own special little way not just her. These benevolent lies just keep coming. This one my oldest daughter had a pet fish that she cared for. The fish recently died so I had to replace it before she came home. She noticed it looked a little different and asked if I noticed anything dissimilar. I replied, “No
Another issue with the implementation of Informed consent arises when the patient waives the right to Informed consent and leaves the right to make the decision on the physician. Though legally correct, this can cause psychological stress for the physician especially when the decision is about a life threatening medical condition. Moreover, this also makes the patient vulnerable to abuse. (Manthous, DeGirolamo, 2003)
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
In his essay, The Refutation of Medical Paternalism, Alan Goldman states his argument against a strong doctor-patient role differentiation, in which the doctor may act against a patients’ immediate will in order to carry treatment in the patients’ best interest. Goldman frames his entire argument around the single assumption that a person’s freedom to decide his future is the most important and fundamental right as he claims “the autonomous individual is the source of those other goods he enjoys, and so is not to be sacrificed for the sake of them.”[1] He claims that the majority of people would agree that they are the best judges of their own self-interest
Currently, most people generally accept a doctor’s word as truth and do not question him or her. When it comes to the medical field, patients can often feel overwhelmed by all the confusing medical terms being thrown at them, so they tend to sit back and do as the doctor says. Healthcare professionals sometimes take advantage of this fact and withhold important information from their patients. For instance, a study conducted by Lisa Lezzoni, MD, and her peers states that more than half of physicians lied to their patients about their diagnosis to put a more positive spin on it (Lezzoni, Rao, DesRoches, Vogeli, and Campbell). Healthcare professionals should disclose to the patient any information pertaining to the patient.
Deception According to Hyman (1989) deception implies that an agent acts or speaks so as to induce a false belief in a target or victim. Deception can occur in everyday life. Whether it is telling someone they look nice or not telling them that they look fat. This is an important process for forming relationships and general social interaction.
Although there are several debates against this view point, it is not up to anyone else to make decisions of the ill and infirm. As such it should be recognized that “patients have a right to make
An informed consent is the sovereign act by the patient or a research subject to authorize a healthcare professional to perform a medical procedure. It means that patients must be briefed on all the goals of the procedure, the methods to be used by the physician and all the risks that they might be subjected to while undergoing therapies/treatments. De Bord (2014), defines informed consent as “Informed consent is the process by which the treating health care provider discloses appropriate information to a competent patient so that the patient may make a voluntary choice to accept or refuse treatment” (as cited in Appelbaum, 2007). In this paper, I will argue that Jay Katz’s claim for the lack of genuine informed consent in healthcare field is firm by demonstrating and buttressing his claim. I will also pinpoint how Jay Katz’s argument is consistent with the medical professionals’ code of ethics
Soon the principle of autonomy gained primacy over paternalistic practices. The principle of autonomy gave patients the right to make decisions on their own behalf. This shifted power and control from physicians to patients, allowing them to refuse treatment and do things that might not be in their best interest. This brings up the debate of resuscitation. Autonomic practices obligate physicians to honor patients’ preferences, including their desire not to be resuscitated. This ethical dilemma often crosses paths with the principle of beneficence. This principle states that we should act in ways that promote the welfare of other people. However, in the event of no resuscitation, a physician is unable to help other people when given the
The question of what constitutes morality is often asked by philosophers. One might wonder why morality is so important, or why many of us trouble ourselves over determining which actions are moral actions. Mill has given an account of the driving force behind our questionings of morality. He calls this driving force “Conscience,” and from this “mass of feeling which must be broken through in order to do what violates our standard of right,” we have derived our concept of morality (Mill 496). Some people may practice moral thought more often than others, and some people may give no thought to morality at all. However, morality is nevertheless a possibility of human nature, and a
Michael H., a 68-year-old man, was admitted for exploratory surgery of his abdomen. He is frail, and his attending physician describes him as “emotionally labile.” Marcy R. is a social worker at BFL General Hospital, who is assigned to the unit that Michael H has been admitted. After Michael’s surgery, Marcy R. was approached by Michael H.’s daughter, Ellen B. in which Ellen has told Marcy that her father’s physician had just informed her that the lab report from the exploratory surgery shows that her father has terminal cancer. Ellen said that she and the family are in shock and they have decided that they not want the hospital staff to tell her father about the terminal nature of his cancer once he recovers from anesthesia. In this essay, I will discuss the ethical dilemma of “to tell Michael or not to tell him he has terminal cancer. He has the right to confidentiality by not withholding information from him when he has been diagnosed with terminal cancer, informed consent, and self-determination.
Lying in medicine seems to be a requirement for doctors because they think that truthful information can hurt patients (Bok 222). According to doctors, while they are telling the truth, patients may have a heart attack or their psychological mechanism might be alleged. Furthermore, death comes more quickly. However, these are so rare and considering these universal is an overgeneralization. In addition, doctors consider their patient as a child and see them like a blind, suffering and passive toy (M.Smith and M.Weil 22); hence, doctors think that they can make choices for their patients without telling the truth to patients. However, this opinion just shows doctors’ paternalistic view (Bok 227).