Health and Social Care OCR Level 2 Gloria Manhera Unit 2: Individual Rights in Health and Social Care By: Imama Shahid Group 716 P2: Explain the individual rights of people who use services. Legislation Regulation: 1. Confidentiality For example, people who have their right to have their privacy which they don’t want the doctor would tell his colleagues or his family. A client make an appointment to see doctor, she is worry that she might have a cancer which the doctor comfort her and wouldn’t tell about this to her family or someone else. They can complain what they are not happy with the doctor or a nurse done to them, it could be wrong information details about them.
If the patient has an intellectual disability they may not be able to consent to treatment due to limited or no understanding of the procedure needing to be done. A substituted decision maker who is authorized by law (legislation such Guardianship Act 1987 NSW) will be appointed. Berman et al (2012 pp74-75) 3) Explain the term duty of care when caring for Elijah? The nurse has the responsibility of providing care to their patient at an acceptable standard within their scope of practice regardless if that patient has been assigned to them or not while they are on duty. Berman et al (2012 p 79) 4) Elijah may not be able to give his own consent and his guardian may be involved, as a nurse you may have to act as an advocate for your client.
The brochure also states that even if they do not have insurance they the facility will try to help by finding financial help or by making other arrangements. Texas Good Samaritan Law The Texas Good Samaritan Law actually protects the person who administers emergency care or an individual unless the person to administer the care is found to have willfully given negligent care. In the case of Sandra this would have played a huge role simply because the consent to treatment was implied and the doctor made the decision to actually perform treatment even though Sandra was incoherent. The doctor actually made an informed decision based on the severity of the wound and in good faith proceeded with treatment to save her life. (Thornhill, Sherri) Respect, Empathy,
This is standard from state to state. This act doesn’t usually pertain to healthcare workers in their hospital setting. The enactment of this law however can be applied when a health care worker is assisting in a medical emergency while off duty and the person attempts to sue following the assistance that was given or if the doctors attempts to collect compensation for the act. This law cannot be used in the emergency room. In the event that the doctor happens to assist someone in which is in need of emergency medical care, and that person happens to be a patient of theirs, then that health care practitioner would be judged according to medical malpractice
Although the growing importance of these social value judgments may be acknowledged, we must not neglect individual patient values (Moore 2010). However, in daily practice, it is doctors who may incorporate these factors in their clinical decisions. Doctors make therapeutic decisions based on the available information for average patients, but they are aware that, sometimes, individual patient values may modify these decisions (Moore 2010). Patients may refuse a cancer treatment that is backed by clinical trial evidence and has positive cost-effectiveness, simply because they are reluctant to suffer the side effects of the therapy, or they may prefer avoiding an inconvenient preventive intervention because they are willing to take the bigger risk of getting the disease, or suffering the complication that the intervention sought to prevent (Moore 2010). Just as the scientific value judgments of organizations should be individualized for each patient by the doctor, social value judgments should be put within the perspective of individual value judgments (Moore 2010).
The legalization of euthanasia would create an escape for incurable patients as well as securing the doctors credibility. This would let patients who do not want to be a burden the ability to leave with a sound mind, and to not let their families see them suffer. For everyone to leave with a smile and to know that they left with out endangering them selves or anyone else. Euthanasia may be a frightening topic and be difficult to discuss without religious or moral interference, but it is a choice that must be made to secure the patients well being and the doctor’s
Legal implications usually arise when the living wills are not up to date. The circumstances are unpredictable and life situation change, for example, living wills cannot possibly cover all possibilities. Although some states do not require advance directives in writing, but if the patient doesn’t have one, it could result in issues similar to Terri Schiavo’s case in 2003 (Fregmen, 2009). Having advanced directive can also spare your family and friends from ongoing trauma, financial liability and other legal implications as well. MINIMIZING THE ETHICAL AND LEGAL DILEMMAS An individual can take a huge burden off his and his family’s shoulders by simply having a living will.
This has produced situations where ethical and legal rights of a patient have come into play and been questioned. To further complicate these matters the state has claimed a right to protect its’ citizens from harm. The problem with this is that there is no true definition of harm to be referenced. The state may feel that having someone on a life support system may be keeping them from harm but the patient and their loved ones may feel that you are only prolonging the inevitable and causing more pain and stress for the loved ones involved. Every American has the right to request that medical treatment be withdrawn or withheld if they so choose.
Current issues in privacy stem around nondisclosure and limited liability clauses that have caused some discouragement from users. We need to have a better way to ensure that user experiences are a positive one, and that users are not afraid to be liable if an undesirable health problem occurs. One way we are looking to improve both study reliability and patient privacy is by promoting transparency and accountability. "Vendors and users need to be able to report any deaths, injuries, or unsafe conditions without having any legal, contractual, or logistic barriers to reporting the incidents" (Institute of Medicine, 2011, para. 8).
Changes have been made and laws have change for the people of this country to be seen as one. People helping other people, is something that comes from the heart and not by imposing a law to make a Good Samaritan. Everyday a person can be faces with a split second decision to help a person in need but it is up to that particular person to do so, not everyone will risk their lives, health to help someone in need. If a jurisdiction was to impose a law to help a person in need when you are able too, it might cause even more problems than what we could imagine. For instance, Valley Village an accident occur not to long along ago and two Samaritans lost their lives in trying to help a person in need, as stated by the Los Angeles Times.