Assignment 9a: My Sister's Keeper Part 1 - 30 Points

Assignment 9a My Sisters Keeper Part 1 30 Points Possible

Research and define the following terms as they relate to the legal and medical ethics presented in the story My Sister's Keeper. These are the central issues needed to base a medical opinion about any case in court: Medical Ethics: Autonomy, Veracity, Fidelity, Beneficence, Non-maleficence, Justice.

Using these as 6 criteria, describe how each of these characteristics related back to the legal arguments and behaviors exhibited by the prosecuting and defense attorneys in this case.

Then, in two to three paragraphs, describe the moral, practical, and emotional complication of putting one child in unnecessary pain and danger for the well-being of another.

Paper For Above instruction

The story of "My Sister's Keeper" raises complex legal and ethical issues centered around advances in medical technology, particularly concerning the rights of the individual versus the needs of others. The core medical ethics principles—autonomy, veracity, fidelity, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice—are fundamentally intertwined with the legal arguments presented in the case. Autonomy refers to the child's right to make decisions about her own body; veracity involves truthful communication between medical providers, patients, and families; fidelity emphasizes loyalty and keeping commitments; beneficence pertains to acting in the best interest of the patient; non-maleficence is the obligation to do no harm; and justice concerns fair distribution of medical resources and treatments. These principles form the backbone for evaluating whether medical decisions and legal arguments are ethically defensible in complex cases like that of "My Sister's Keeper."

In the courtroom, these principles influence the strategies and behaviors of the prosecuting and defense attorneys. The defense may emphasize the child's right to autonomy and the importance of truthful information, arguing that medical interventions should respect her wishes and her dignity. Conversely, the prosecution might focus on beneficence and non-maleficence—arguing that withholding treatment could cause harm to the sister, thus justifying medical intervention—even at the expense of autonomy. The attorneys' framing of these ethical considerations directly impacts the legal arguments, as they navigate the tension between individual rights and the perceived good of others, ultimately illustrating how core ethical principles shape legal strategies and decisions in such morally complex cases.

Put simply, placing one child in unnecessary pain and danger to benefit another raises profound moral, practical, and emotional dilemmas. Morally, it questions the justification of causing harm to one individual for the supposed benefit of another, challenging principles of respect and justice. Practically, it involves difficult decisions about weighing the potential benefits against the risks and suffering inflicted on the child—highlighting the limits and responsibilities inherent in medical interventions. Emotionally, such situations can evoke feelings of guilt, despair, and conflicting loyalties among families, clinicians, and legal professionals. The dilemma emphasizes the importance of carefully balancing ethical principles with compassion and humane considerations when making life-altering medical decisions involving children, especially in cases where the line between treatment and experimentation becomes blurred.

References

• Childress, J. F., & Beauchamp, T. L. (2013). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (7th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Faden, R. R., Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (1986). A history and theory of informed consent. Oxford University Press.
• Gillon, R. (1994). Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to scope. BMJ, 309(6948), 184–188.
• Leiken, A., & Gabel, W. (2004). Ethics of medical care. In B. J. Sadock, V. A. Sadock, & P. Ruiz (Eds.), Kaplan & Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry (8th ed., pp. 2326–2333). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
• Ontario Medical Association. (2010). Ethical Principles and Decision-Making Frameworks. Ontario Medical Review, 60(2), 20–25.
• Rosenbaum, S. (2020). The ethics of pediatric medical decisions. Pediatrics, 145(3), e20191200.
• Snyder, L., & Holmes, S. (2014). Ethical dilemmas in pediatric medical decision-making. Journal of Pediatric Ethics, 3(1), 45–52.
• Tan, F., & Lee, K. (2017). Autonomy and beneficence in pediatric healthcare: The boundaries of consent. Journal of Medical Ethics, 43(4), 251–255.
• Vandergast, L. (2012). Justice in healthcare: Ethical principles and practical applications. Bioethics, 26(7), 374–383.
• Wilkinson, D. (2013). Medical ethics and health law. Oxford University Press.