Develop A Situation Confronting Ethical Problems Related To ✓ Solved

Develop a situation confronting ethical problems related to patients

Develop, in detail, a situation in which a health care worker might be confronted with ethical problems related to patients and prescription drug use OR patients in a state of poverty. Your scenario must be original to you and this assignment. It cannot be from the discussion boards in this class or any other previous forum. Articulate (and then assess) the ethical solutions that can be found using "care" (care-based ethics) and "rights" ethics to those problems. Assessment must ask if the solutions are flawed, practicable, persuasive, etc.

What health care technology is involved in the situation? What moral guidelines for using that kind of healthcare technology should be used there? Explore such guidelines also using utilitarianism, Kantian deontology, ethical egoism, or social contract ethics. Say how social technologies such as blogs, crowdfunding, online encyclopedias can be used in either case. What moral guidelines for using that kind of healthcare technology should be used there? Develop such guidelines also using utilitarianism, Kantian deontology, ethical egoism, or social contract ethics.

You should not be using any text you used in a discussion board or assignment for this class or any previous class. Cite the textbook and incorporate outside sources, including citations.

Writing Requirements (APA format) Length: 3-4 pages (not including title page or references page) 1-inch margins Double spaced 12-point Times New Roman font Title page References page (minimum of 2 scholarly sources) Reference Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Education.

Paper For Above Instructions

In the rapidly evolving landscape of health care, ethical dilemmas proliferate, especially when intersecting with vulnerable populations, such as those living in poverty or facing chronic health issues exacerbated by insufficient access to medications. This paper will explore an original scenario wherein a health care worker encounters ethical challenges associated with patients who are unable to afford necessary prescription drugs due to their socioeconomic status.

Consider the case of a primary care physician, Dr. Smith, who practices in an underserved community. Many of her patients are low-income individuals and families struggling to make ends meet. One day, a patient named Maria visits the clinic to refill her prescription for insulin, which she requires to manage her type 1 diabetes. Maria, a single mother of two, informs Dr. Smith that she cannot afford the prescribed medication due to the exorbitant cost and has been rationing her insulin to make it last longer. This rationing has resulted in her experiencing recurrent episodes of hyperglycemia, putting her life at risk.

Dr. Smith faces a multifaceted ethical dilemma: must she advocate for Maria’s health needs against the backdrop of systemic inequities that dictate access to medications? In this case, care-based ethics and rights-based ethics will offer frameworks for resolving these dilemmas.

From a care-based ethics perspective, the primary concern is for the well-being of the patient. This ethical approach emphasizes empathy, compassion, and the relational aspects of care between Dr. Smith and Maria (Held, 2006). Dr. Smith must assess the immediacy of Maria's medical condition, recognizing that denying her access to necessary medication poses a direct threat to her health. The ethical solution here leans towards advocating for Maria by seeking resources such as patient assistance programs offered by pharmaceutical companies or non-profit organizations that help subsidize medication costs for low-income patients.

However, Dr. Smith's dilemma is not without its flaws. While advocating for Maria's access to medication is morally commendable, it may be impracticable due to bureaucratic hurdles and the limited availability of assistance programs. The effectiveness of such solutions is not always guaranteed and can lead to further frustrations for the patient and health care provider alike (Beauchamp & Childress, 2019).

In contrast, a rights-based ethics approach emphasizes the entitlements of individuals to access health care and essential medications. According to this perspective, Maria has a fundamental right to receive adequate health care and the medications necessary to sustain her health (Dworkin, 2013). Dr. Smith can argue that systemic structures should be modified to ensure equitable access to health care resources for impoverished communities. Engaging in advocacy for health policy reform to lower drug prices or increase funding for community health initiatives becomes essential in this ethical approach.

Nonetheless, the rights-based ethical framework also possesses its flaws. While advocating for patient rights is important, the complexity of the healthcare system and political realities can hinder immediate changes, leaving patients like Maria in limbo. Therefore, solutions derived from this perspective may be seen as aspirational rather than directly applicable in urgent scenarios (Freeman, 2007).

In this scenario, health care technology can be at the forefront of the ethical conversation. Telemedicine presents an opportunity to bridge gaps in access, allowing patients like Maria to consult with providers remotely and gain timely assistance without the burden of transportation costs (Bashshur et al., 2016). However, ethical guidelines must govern the use of such technologies, ensuring they enhance patient autonomy and do not exploit vulnerable populations.

Utilitarianism, for instance, may suggest that telemedicine should be employed where it maximizes overall well-being. Yet, it could lead to an ethical quandary if it encourages overutilization of services or if it burdens patients with new forms of technology that they may not understand or access comfortably (Mill, 1863). Similarly, Kantian deontology would stress the importance of treating patients as ends in themselves—not merely means to achieving overall efficiency in health care delivery (Kant, 1785). This emphasizes the necessity for providers to guarantee that technological solutions empower patients rather than disempower them.

Social technologies such as blogs and online forums can also foster community among patients facing similar challenges, offering support systems where individuals can share experiences and access information about financial resources for medications (Katz et al., 2008). However, the challenge lies in ensuring that the information shared adheres to ethical standards of accuracy and respect for privacy. Crowd-funding platforms offer a unique solution for securing finances to cover the costs of required medications, but they must uphold principles of transparency and integrity (Bennett et al., 2016).

In conclusion, the ethical complexities surrounding healthcare access for low-income patients must navigate through the intricate web of care ethics and rights ethics to yield practical solutions that address immediate patient needs while advocating for broader systemic changes. The integration of technology must similarly uphold ethical guidelines that prioritize patient welfare and autonomy. Ultimately, by recognizing the interplay of these ethical frameworks, healthcare workers can better navigate their roles, ensuring that patients receive the care they deserve.

References

• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Bashshur, R. L., Shannon, G. W., Smith, B. R., & Woodward, A. (2016). The role of telehealth in an evolving health care environment: Working paper. Health Affairs, 35(2), 191-196.
• Bennett, K. J., Borders, T. F., & Wilkins, K. (2016). Governance and ethical issues in crowdfunding for health care: A systematic review. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 41(4), 675-694.
• Dworkin, R. (2013). Freedom’s law: The moral reading of the American Constitution. Harvard University Press.
• Freeman, S. (2007). Rawls. Routledge.
• Held, V. (2006). The ethics of care: Personal, political, and global. Oxford University Press.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork for the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge University Press.
• Katz, J. E., & Peace, R. (2008). The role of social media in health communication. Journal of Health Communication, 13(7), 677-684.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.