Case Study: Healing And Autonomy - Mike And Joanne Ar 723009

Case Study Healing And Autonomymike And Joanne Are The Parents Of Jam

Mike and Joanne are the parents of James and Samuel, identical twins born eight years ago. James is currently suffering from acute glomerulonephritis and kidney failure, which originated from a complication of strep throat infection. The infection spread, leading to kidney deterioration. Initially, James was brought to the hospital due to complications including elevated blood pressure and fluid buildup necessitating temporary dialysis. The attending physician recommended immediate dialysis, but Mike and Joanne decided to forgo this treatment, opting instead to seek faith-based healing influenced by recent sermons and testimonies of miraculous recoveries. They planned to return to the hospital after attending faith healing services.

However, James’s health worsened, and dialysis became unavoidable. His condition deteriorated, requiring a kidney transplant, but their initial inability to find a compatible donor led them to consider the possibility of Samuel donating a kidney since he is a sibling and an ideal tissue match. Mike struggles with the decision of whether Samuel should undergo the risk of surgery or wait for divine intervention. This decision entails complex ethical considerations rooted in principles of autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence, as well as Christian faith values.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The decision-making process in pediatric healthcare often involves a delicate balance between respecting patient autonomy, promoting beneficence and nonmaleficence, and considering cultural and religious beliefs. The case of Mike and Joanne's dilemma surrounding their son James’s treatment, especially their hesitancy to accept medical intervention in favor of faith healing, exemplifies these complex ethical considerations. This paper explores the decision-making involved from different perspectives, emphasizing the importance of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and the role of spiritual assessment in guiding healthcare decisions.

Analysis of Decision-Making and Principle of Autonomy

The principle of autonomy recognizes the right of individuals—or in pediatric cases, legal guardians—to make decisions about medical treatment. In this case, Mike and Joanne are the primary decision-makers for James. Their initial refusal of dialysis was based on faith, reflecting their religious beliefs and trust in divine healing over medical intervention. However, ethical tensions arise considering James's age and capacity to participate in decisions; thus, autonomy also extends to respecting James's wellbeing and future preferences.

From their perspective, Mike and Joanne's decision was rooted in their religious autonomy, where faith and trust in divine intervention are integral to their worldview. They believed that faith healing might align with God's will, potentially leading to miraculous recovery. Conversely, the healthcare team emphasizes that withholding established medical treatment contrary to evidence-based practice risks harm (nonmaleficence) and fails to promote beneficence. The dilemma is whether to honor the guardians' spiritual autonomy and beliefs or prioritize the child's immediate health and life preservation through medical means.

Furthermore, Samuel’s potential kidney donation introduces additional autonomy considerations for him. Since Samuel, as a minor, may not fully understand or consent to the procedure, ethical principles demand proper informed consent procedures and assessments of his capacity and voluntariness. Respecting Samuel's developing autonomy involves ensuring he is adequately informed and agrees freely, which complicates the decision since his autonomy is still maturing.

Christian Perspective and the Principles of Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

From a Christian ethical perspective, faith and divine intervention are highly significant. Many Christian teachings emphasize trust in God's plan and healing power, which can influence decisions to pursue faith healing over medical intervention. Religious beliefs may motivate guardians to seek miracles, aligning with the principle of beneficence by aiming for what they perceive as the best outcome—healing through divine means. Nevertheless, Christianity also advocates for compassion, care, and the protection of children's well-being, which aligns with beneficence and nonmaleficence principles.

In this case, the secular medical perspective prioritizes beneficence by preventing harm and actively promoting James's health through dialysis and transplantation. Conversely, the guardians’ faith-based approach raises concerns about nonmaleficence, as refusing immediate medical intervention risks further deterioration and death. Ethical religious counseling might assist guardians in reconciling faith with medical necessity, emphasizing that faith and medicine are not mutually exclusive, fostering a holistic approach to beneficence.

The Role of Spiritual Needs Assessment

A spiritual needs assessment plays a vital role in understanding the religious and spiritual values influencing Mike and Joanne's decisions. This assessment can help healthcare providers respect the family's beliefs while supporting their emotional and spiritual needs. Understanding their reliance on faith-based healing enables providers to facilitate communication, provide spiritual support, and explore avenues where spiritual practices can complement medical treatment.

Moreover, a spiritual assessment can uncover underlying fears, hopes, and cultural factors influencing the guardians' reluctance towards medical intervention. Recognizing these elements allows healthcare teams to tailor interventions that respect religious beliefs while emphasizing the importance of timely medical treatment. For example, spiritual leaders or chaplains could collaborate with medical staff to ensure the guardians' spiritual needs are met without compromising medical care, ultimately fostering trust and shared decision-making.

Recommendations and Ethical Considerations

Integrating spiritual needs assessments into clinical practice facilitates a patient-centered approach rooted in respect for individual cultural and religious contexts. Ethical decision-making should involve shared discussions among healthcare providers, guardians, and, when appropriate, the child. Education about the risks and benefits of medical versus faith-based healing is essential to help guardians make informed choices aligned with beneficence and nonmaleficence.

Involving spiritual leaders can also promote a balanced view, where faith is integrated with medical treatment, possibly encouraging guardians to consent to life-saving interventions. Ultimately, the healthcare team must prioritize the child's best interests, ensuring decisions do not violate ethical principles while respecting spiritual beliefs.

Conclusion

The case of Mike and Joanne's struggle highlights the ethical complexities within pediatric healthcare decisions involving faith, autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence. Respecting guardians' spiritual autonomy while safeguarding the child's health requires a nuanced approach that includes spiritual assessment, effective communication, and ethical deliberation. Integrating faith and medicine into a collaborative framework can help achieve the common goal of promoting the child's well-being while honoring spiritual values.

References

• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Johnstone, M. J. (2016). Bioethics: A Nursing Perspective (7th ed.). Elsevier.
• Hodge, D. R. (2018). Spiritual assessment and intervention: Connecting faith and health. Journal of Pastoral Care & Counseling, 72(1), 24–33.
• O'Connell, M. E., Beattie, K., & Merrill, H. (2017). Ethical and legal considerations in child healthcare. Pediatric Annals, 46(4), e127–e132.
• Sulmasy, D. P. (2017). Medical ethics and spirituality. Cambridge University Press.
• Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). Ethics and the Qualitative Research Process. In Y. S. Lincoln & N. K. Denzin (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research.
• Montgomery, K. (2017). Faith and medicine: Faith healing in American culture. Oxford University Press.
• Kozma, L. H. (2015). Spirituality, Religion, and Healing. In R. J. Smith & V. S. Puchalski (Eds.), The Role of Spirituality and Religion in the Practice of Medicine. National Institute of Health.
• Koenig, H. G. (2014). Spirituality in patient's health: What healthcare professionals need to know. The Journal of Religion and Health, 55(4), 944–958.
• Mc Kee, N. (2019). Pediatric ethics and religion-induced dilemmas. Journal of Medical Ethics, 45(2), 153–157.