Kjell Asplund and Mona Britton, authors of Ethics of life support in patients with severe stroke, argue that there is a specific protocol that should be followed in order to deal with the multitude of ethical complications coma patients introduce. I disagree with this argument, because I think that the quantification of one’s life is an inhumane and ineffective method of treating patients. As an idealistic student aspiring to pursue allopathic medicine, I believe that the field I immerse myself in should not be an environment bogged down with impediments to moral action. Instead of a rigid method, I think that a case-by-case method remains the most appropriate action for patients with severe brain malfunctions. Before we delve into the moral implications surrounding care for stroke patients, it is important to understand what a stroke is.
One of the biggest issues with physicians prescribing placebos is they are doing so without even telling their patients what it is. Many physicians feel that placebos will not work if they explain to their patient what they are giving them. So when prescribing placebos they often tell their patients that they are prescribing them something that has been effective with other patients. And if they do decide to get the patients consent for use of the medication, the physicians are not even required to say its true name, “placebo”. The reason physicians feel that placebos work without the patient knowing is because when the patients take the medicine they believe they will get better, which causes a physiological change in the body.
Where clearly has brought a difficult situation to the healthcare team of the hospital raising ethical and legal issues in all aspects due to the fact that the parents of the pregnant teen have refused any assistance and the nurse assigned has complied silently. This scenario compromises patient safety and puts the minor and child in medical danger. Not only are the lives of the minor and the teen in danger but also it raises an ethical issue of the hospital and patients’ rights. It would make sense to attempt to provide all medical attention necessary to promote patient safety for the sake of the minor and unborn child but also it is important to evaluate the legal liability of the hospital to determine if the parents have all the rights and responsibility in decision making for their daughter. Therefore, treating all patients fairly is an ethical duty of the hospital and staff with respect to values and beliefs.
. A nurse’s perceptions about quality of life and health promotion could affect the care of a dying patient with a lingering illness, such as cancer. Nurses are patient advocates and it is their responsibility to respect patients’ wishes regardless of their personal opinion. A nurse may personally feel that a patient should use any and all medications available to them such as pain medication, etc. during a lingering illness.
Leaving a medical facility against a physician’s advice puts a patient at risk for untreated or incompletely treated medical issues, increases the need for subsequent readmission or visits to emergency departments and increases the risk of mortality. DAMA presents a dilemma not only to the attending physician but to the nursing staff caring for the patient. Ethically and legally, patients do have the right to agree to or retract consent for medical treatment; however the nursing management of DAMA is much more complicated and multi-faceted than the patient’s right to consent or dissent to treatment. Problems occur with the understanding of the different types of self-discharge from emergency departments, as well as how best to document such encounters and ultimately, how to improve upon current nursing
Withdrawal of food and fluid from terminally ill patients is a growing ethical issue and concerns patients, families, and nurses as well. The study sampled 160 nurses and they completed a questionnaire that included forced-choice and open-ended questions and the act of withdrawing treatment was supported by nurses only for two specific conditions - if the patients requested it and if it relieved the patient of his or her suffering. However, it is widely agreed that doctors' orders, family's requests or even the patient's advanced age could not and should not ethically justify the act of withholding or withdrawing treatment. The study suggests that apart from the direct clinical issues concerned, the ethical, social and cultural factors seem to play a significant role in any decision of withdrawing or withholding treatment. In this essay we discuss the implications of withdrawing treatment and the role of nurses in this regard.
Nursing Consideration for Providing Supporting Care for the Terminally Ill Patient Nursing Consideration for Providing Supporting Care for the Terminally Ill Patient In 1716, Christopher Bullock wrote “‘tis impossible to be sure of anything but Death and Taxes.” Death being one of these inevitabilities hopefully leaves you more empathetic in life and in offering supportive care. There are many different ways of providing care for a terminally ill patient. None more important that offering patient supportive based care. Family members may find it challenging, both physically and emotionally, caring for a terminally ill loved one, but need to be aware of their own feelings and make decisions based on the what is best for the suffering person. A caregiver, while providing supporting care can instill a sense of strength.
As nurses we often deal with ethical dilemmas in our everyday clinical practice; and as professionals we have the responsibility to analyse and examine any ethical problems that may arise. Any decision should be based on ethical principle that protects both the patient and the health care provider. So what is an ethical dilemma? It is a problem without a satisfactory resolution. The ethical decision-making lays in the fact that very different ethical choices regarding the same ethical dilemma can be made resulting in neither choice being a “right or wrong” decision.
There has been many debates to weather doctors should be able to refuse lazy/old patients expensive treatments as they are not beating their habits, so why should doctors have to give these patients the treatment when they are not making the effort to get their body in a fitter, healthier state, and there is people out there desperate for surgery who have made the effort to be in shape and they can’t get the surgery because it is too expensive,but on the otherwise, why should these people have to suffer without help? In hospitals all over the world there are smokers, overweight people and alcoholics receiving the same treatment as other patients that are healthier and choose not to harm their bodies by using harmful substances, which I personally think is an absolute disgrace. As these people who abuse their bodies have the same “right” to these expensive treatments even though some of the substances they choose to eat, drink or inhale cause damage, disease and infections within the human body, and not enough is been done about it. People that work for the telegraph would agree as on their website it states "Smokers, heavy drinkers, the obese and the elderly should be barred from receiving some operations, according to doctors, with most saying the health service cannot afford to provide free care to everyone." - this information can be found on -http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576704/Dont-treat-the-old-and-unhealthy-say-doctors.html Some doctors say old people may not be healthy enough to survive operations and could be life threatening and doctors are allowed to discriminate old people if they think they really need the operations to cure/help them, however the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) says "doctors must not discriminate against patients who have brought their illnesses upon themselves.
Euthanasia opponent always claims that doctors have the duty to help the patient to continue alive even depending on machines only. Otherwise, it is murder. This is ridicules. First, is life-sustaining treatment or artificial feeding methods really “helping” the patients? Can these kinds of treatment really get patient and their families out of suffering as well as give hope?