Cure, Care, Compare, And Contrast Basic Care: Nutrition, Hyd

Cure Care Compare And Contrastbasic Care Nutrition Hydration Sh

Cure and care are fundamental concepts in healthcare, each encompassing different roles and responsibilities in patient treatment and well-being. Basic care, encompassing nutrition, hydration, shelter, and human interaction, forms the foundation of supportive health services. The ethical obligations surrounding these aspects raise important questions about moral duties to patients and when interventions are necessary or justified. This paper explores the distinctions between cure and care, examines the ethical considerations related to basic care involving nutrition and hydration, and discusses specific clinical interventions such as swallow tests, medically assisted nutrition and hydration, enteral and parenteral nutrition, along with a bioethical analysis exemplified through the case of Terri Schiavo.

Comparison of Cure and Care

Cure refers primarily to medical interventions aimed at eliminating disease, repairing or restoring health through treatments such as surgery, medication, or other procedures. It is goal-oriented, focusing on directly addressing the pathology causing illness. In contrast, care emphasizes holistic support, comfort, and emotional well-being, often involving ongoing human interaction, nurturing, and attention to the patient's psychological and social needs. While cure seeks to eradicate disease, care nurtures the individual regardless of their prognosis, emphasizing dignity and compassion (Tronto, 1993).

Clinically, cure often involves aggressive interventions aimed at specific health targets, whereas care may be ongoing regardless of cure, especially in chronic, terminal, or palliative contexts. This differentiation underscores an ethical debate about the extent of medical intervention, especially when cure is no longer possible (Shale, 2012).

Basic Care: Nutrition, Hydration, Shelter, Human Interaction

Basic care encompasses essential elements necessary for human survival and dignity. Nutrition and hydration are vital to maintain bodily functions, support healing, and prevent complications such as dehydration or malnutrition. Shelter provides safety and comfort, whereas human interaction addresses psychological health, alleviating loneliness and fostering social connection (Benner et al., 2010).

Morally, healthcare providers are generally obliged to ensure these basic needs are met because they are fundamental human rights, essential for quality of life. Ignoring these needs raises ethical concerns related to neglect and abandonment, especially for vulnerable populations like the elderly or critically ill (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). The obligation stems from principles of beneficence (doing good) and respect for human dignity.

Swallow Test: Description and Indications

The swallow test, also known as a bedside dysphagia assessment, evaluates a patient's ability to safely swallow, preventing aspiration pneumonia and ensuring adequate nutrition. It involves observing the patient swallowing different consistencies of food or liquids under controlled conditions (Logemann, 1998). Indications for this test include observed or suspected difficulty swallowing, neurological impairments (such as stroke), or after surgeries affecting the head and neck.

Thus, the swallow test is performed prior to initiating oral feeding in at-risk patients, ensuring safety and guiding feeding strategies.

Medically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration: When Is It Indicated?

Medically assisted nutrition and hydration (N/H) become necessary when patients are unable to meet their nutritional needs through oral intake alone due to conditions like severe dysphagia, coma, or other neurological impairments. Indications include persistent inability to swallow safely, malnutrition, dehydration, or if treatment aims to sustain life (National Institutes of Health, 2020).

The decision to initiate assisted N/H involves evaluating the patient's prognosis, wishes, and ethical considerations, especially when quality of life is compromised or prognosis is poor.

Enteral Nutrition: Definitions and Types

• Nasal Jejunum Tube (NJ Tube): A feeding tube inserted through the nose into the jejunum, bypassing the stomach, used when gastric feeding is contraindicated or poorly tolerated (Craig et al., 2016).
• Nasal Gastric (NG) Tube: A tube inserted nasally into the stomach for short-term feeding. It allows administration of nutrients directly into the stomach (Heyland et al., 2014).
• Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG): A surgically or endoscopically inserted tube through the abdominal wall directly into the stomach, suitable for long-term enteral feeding (Kraft et al., 2014).

Parenteral Nutrition: Definitions and Types

• Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN): Systemic delivery of nutrients intravenously, bypassing the gastrointestinal tract entirely, used when GI function is inadequate (Kraft et al., 2014).
• Partial Parenteral Nutrition (PPN): Provides supplemental nutrients through peripheral veins, typically for short-term or less severe cases (Moore & Pennington, 2012).

Bioethical Analysis of Nutrition and Hydration

Nutrition and hydration are considered basic human rights, and withholding or withdrawing them raises significant ethical considerations. The principle of beneficence obligates healthcare providers to act in the patient's best interest, including ensuring adequate nutrition and hydration (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). Respect for autonomy emphasizes honoring patients' wishes, including advance directives or living wills.

Exceptions to these principles include situations where treatment would be futile, burdensome, or contrary to the patient's expressed wishes—this represents the principle of non-maleficence (do no harm). For example, if artificially administered nutrition and hydration prolong suffering without meaningful benefit, withdrawal may be ethically justified (Miller, 2002). The general consensus is that nutrition and hydration should not be considered ordinary care but can be ethically withheld in certain circumstances, especially when they no longer contribute to the patient's well-being.

Case Study: Terri Schiavo

The Terri Schiavo case exemplifies complex ethical issues surrounding artificial nutrition and hydration, autonomy, and end-of-life decision-making. Schiavo, a woman in a persistent vegetative state, had her feeding tube withdrawn following legal battles between her husband and parents, with the courts ultimately ruling in favor of the withdrawal. This case raised profound questions about patient autonomy, surrogate decision-making, and the moral status of life-sustaining treatments (Rothman et al., 2003).

Proponents of withholding nutrition and hydration argued that Schiavo's prognosis was irreversible and maintaining her artificially prolonged suffering. Opponents contended that her stimulation of life should be maintained unless there was clear evidence of her wishes. The case highlighted the importance of advance directives and the ethical need for clear communication of patient preferences. It demonstrated how cultural, religious, and personal values influence decisions concerning life-sustaining treatments (Kass et al., 2005).

Analyzing this case through bioethical principles, it becomes evident that respecting autonomy, promoting beneficence, and avoiding harm are integral. The controversy underscores the importance of early advance care planning and the need for healthcare providers to navigate ethical tensions sensitively (Dolan et al., 2014).

References

• Benner, P., Sutphen, R., Leonard, V., & Day, L. (2010). Educating nurses: A call for radical transformation. Jossey-Bass.
• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2013). Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Craig, A., McCullough, M., & Kinn, S. (2016). Enteral nutrition and feeding tubes. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25(17-18), 2558-2569.
• Dolan, J. G., et al. (2014). Ethical issues in end-of-life care: The importance of advance directives. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 17(4), 430–434.
• Heyland, D. K., et al. (2014). Recommendations on nutrition for critically ill elderly patients. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 38(3), 405–409.
• Kass, L. R., et al. (2005). Ethical challenges in the management of persistent vegetative state and minimally conscious state patients. Neurology, 65(11), 1650–1654.
• Kraft, R. M., et al. (2014). The use of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in stroke patients. Neurologic Clinics, 32(1), 113–124.
• Logemann, J. A. (1998). Evaluation and treatment of swallowing disorders. Pro-Ed.
• Miller, T. (2002). Ethics and artificial nutrition and hydration. Nutrition in Clinical Practice, 17(1), 78–86.
• Moore, E., & Pennington, L. (2012). Parenteral nutrition: A review. British Journal of Hospital Medicine, 73(3), 156–159.
• National Institutes of Health. (2020). Nutrition support in clinical practice. NIH Publication.
• Rothman, D. J., et al. (2003). The case of Terri Schiavo: Moral, legal, and ethical aspects. The New England Journal of Medicine, 348(21), 2127–2130.
• Shale, S. (2012). When is care not a cure? The ethical challenges of caring for chronic and terminal illnesses. Bioethics, 26(2), 109–118.
• Tronto, J. C. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political analysis. Routledge.