I believe he has the right to an advance directive because he is of sound mind and it is his choice to decline the modern cancer treatment. 5. Does the patient in this case have a right to refuse treatment? Why or why not? I do believe he has the right to refuse treatment because he is of sound mind and its his choice what he
_If I were the assistant in question in this scenario, the ethical school of thought I would subscribe to would be the Virtue Ethics school of thought. The Virtue Ethics school of thought focuses on practical wisdom as well as moral character to solve these types of ethical issues. In this case, the patient does pose a certain risk to the healthcare providers since he does carry the AIDS virus, but practical wisdom tells me that, through the use of proper PPE and using caution and awareness, this risk is minimal and can be virtually eliminated altogether. On the other hand, if treatment were to be refused to this patient based on this slight and avoidable risk, the repercussions of that refusal would be much greater and more profound on my life and career than the risk of contracting AIDS through this procedure would be. Through this school of thought, the solution to the problem becomes obvious and I would continue to treat the patient while protecting myself with the use of gloves and other PPE as appropriate to the procedure.
“From an ethical viewpoint, if a rational adult who has been fully apprised of the consequences of not receiving this treatment persists in a refusal, the decision should be respected” (Effa-Heap, 2009). Even if the patient has a life threating illness, in which blood transfusions is the rational and quickest way of treatment. It is the health care team’s duty to investigate another course of action that the patient might find suitable, such as medications. This paper analyzes the ethical principles surrounding blood transfusion in Jehovah’s Witness patients. Ethical Principles “Respect for humans as a function of human dignity is the primary ethical responsibility for nurses in practice” (Chitty & Black, 2011).
I think it is a duty of every husband to do whatever they can to save a wife’s life and protect them at any cost, it’s not an obligation by any means but mentally you would have to in this situation think could you live with yourself by not trying when this wonder drug could save the life of someone you love. The duty is the main focus when facing this kind of situation as a husband it should be the only reason if not for the love. 4. If Heinz doesn’t love his wife, should he steal the drug for her? Does it make a difference in what Heinz should do whether or not he loves his wife?
People who argue with Kevorkian for physician-assisted suicide feel that by helping a patient end his or her life peacefully is helpful to family and friends. Joe Masserli points out main arguments for and against assisted suicide in his political assessment of the subject. He argues equally for and against the topic, which points out many things that go unnoticed by those with bold opinions on assisted suicide. Masserli points out the amount of pain that a patient can be spared from, the fundamental freedom of the right to die, the Death with Dignity Act in Oregon, the reduction of healthcare costs, the freeing of doctor and nurse time, the pain and anguish that a patient’s family can be saved from, the
Under federal and some state laws medical facilities need consent from patients or, in the event of incompetency of the patient, informed consent of the legal surrogate. The Supreme Court has not dealt with “quality of life issues” and appears to only condone active or passive “euthanasia” (not legally defined) when there is evidence that consent has been obtained from the competent patient or legal surrogate of an incompetent patient.There are many pros and cons to euthanasia and I feel that the pros outweigh the cons. The most debated are the moral, ethical, and rights issues. Some of these pros and cons argued are the right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a
It challenges trust between doctor and patient. We expect physicians to heal and preserve life, not to kill on request. I reply that I want to be able to trust my doctor to do what is best for me in every situation. I would not ask a doctor to do anything illegal, but if physician-assisted death were permitted by law, I would not want to be abandoned in my final hours. The main reason I’m against assisted suicide is Its God's place to decide the time and place of a person's death.
This act should be null and void, since a physician should not be allowed to deny aid to one in need. Even though the Hippocratic Oath is not taken up by all physicians, it still should be followed, since it contains guidelines of how to be a “good” physician. It states in the Hippocratic Oath that a physician is “to practice and prescribe to the best of my ability for the good of my patients, and to try and avoid harming them.” In other words, a physician must not harm a patient, whether it is making mistakes or denying them aid. When someone is in need of medical assistance, a physician should not deny it just because he does not want to. Their top priority as a doctor is to help others, and one is not helping someone by denying them aid.
A duty can arise through contract,[9] a voluntary undertaking,[10] a blood relation with whom one lives,[11] and occasionally through one's official position. [12] Duty also can arise from one's own creation of a dangerous situation. [13] On the other hand, it was held in the U.K. that switching off the life support of someone in a persistent vegetative state is an omission to act and not criminal. Since discontinuation of power is not a voluntary act, not grossly negligent, and is in the patient's best interests, no crime takes place. [14] In this case it was held that since a PVS patient could not give or withhold consent to medical treatment, it was for the doctors to decide whether treatment was in the patient's best interest.
The reason for this window of time for the infection to develop is because hospitals try to have the duration of hospital stays decreased. Therefore, the symptoms of the infections aren’t discovered until after the patient has returned home. Hospital-acquired infections are also an indication of how well patient care and safety is at the hospital. The safety and quality of care for the patients should always be a hospital’s first priority. Hospital-acquired infections are preventable and preventing them is straightforward: a code of cleanliness.