HCS335 V10 Summative Assessment Decision-Making Investigatio

Hcs335 V10summative Assessment Decision-Making Investigation Example

Identify an ethical dilemma you may encounter in the workplace. (Your answer for this item does not need to be 75-150 words.) An ethical dilemma that I encountered in the workplace involved an 80-year-old male who was admitted to the hospital with complications from Stage 4 lung cancer treatment.

The further treatments he received in the hospital left him in intractable pain, sleepy, unable to take nourishment by mouth, and incoherent. The gentleman’s doctor talked to his daughter about treatment options. The options (and thus the crux of the dilemma) were to continue with the chemotherapy or to withdraw treatment. His daughter, who was his designated surrogate decision-maker, wanted to take him off his intravenous fluids and medications to allow him to die a natural death. I was that daughter.

Paper For Above instruction

In the healthcare setting, ethical dilemmas frequently arise when the principles of patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice come into conflict. One profound example is the decision concerning end-of-life care for terminally ill patients, as exemplified by a personal experience involving the care of an elderly relative with advanced cancer. Such situations demand careful ethical analysis to balance respect for patient rights with the medical duty to do no harm and promote good.

The dilemma centered around whether to continue aggressive treatment, including chemotherapy, which could extend life but at the expense of significant suffering, or to withdraw treatment entirely, focusing on comfort care and respecting the patient's natural death process. In this context, the principle of autonomy was especially salient; the patient’s prior expressed wishes and advance directives provided critical guidance, but the decision ultimately rested with the surrogate decision-maker. Determining whether to prolong life or prioritize quality of life involved evaluating the competing ethical principles and applying ethical frameworks.

To navigate this dilemma, an ethical problem-solving methodology, such as the four-box approach or principled decision-making model, is instrumental. The first step is to identify the ethical issue explicitly: Should medical treatment continue, or should it be withdrawn to prioritize the patient’s comfort and dignity? This entails distinguishing ethical concerns from purely medical or legal issues. Second, gathering all relevant facts—clinical data, patient’s wishes, family perspectives, and legal considerations—is crucial. In this case, the surrogate decision-maker (me) was fully informed by the healthcare team about prognosis, treatment options, and legal rights to refuse treatment.

The third step involves analyzing the situation through the lens of core ethical principles: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Respecting my father’s autonomy, as expressed through his advance directive, guided the decision to withdraw active treatment. Beneficence and non-maleficence supported alleviating suffering by limiting invasive procedures and focusing on comfort, while justice ensured fair access to palliative care resources. Applying these principles helps clarify the moral course of action.

Further, considering the situation from alternative ethical theories, such as Kantian deontology or Virtue Ethics, enriches the decision-making process. Kantian ethics emphasizes duty and moral law—our obligation to respect the dignity of persons and act according to principles that could be universally adopted. From this perspective, honoring the patient's wishes aligns with moral duty. Virtue Ethics, focusing on moral character, encourages compassion, integrity, and prudence, virtues essential in navigating end-of-life decisions.

Ethical conflicts often emerge when principles conflict—for instance, between the desire to preserve life and the need to prevent suffering. Resolving such conflicts involves balancing principles and consulting with ethics committees, legal counsel, and the healthcare team. It is imperative to ensure decisions are legally compliant; in many jurisdictions, a patient’s advance directive and surrogate decision-maker rights are protected under law, facilitating morally and legally appropriate choices.

Regarding legal considerations, statutes on advance directives, doctors' orders, and patient rights guide clinical practice. In this scenario, laws affirmed the surrogate’s authority to make healthcare decisions aligned with the patient's prior expressed wishes. Documenting the decision-making process and the ethical rationale is vital for accountability and transparency.

Finally, proposing a way forward, communication and documentation are essential. In this case, after a thorough ethical analysis and consultation with the healthcare team, a decision was made to halt invasive treatments and focus on palliative care. The impact was profound: alleviating suffering, honoring the patient’s dignity, and providing the family with peace of mind. Reflecting on the process highlights the importance of structured ethical problem-solving frameworks in supporting sound clinical and moral decisions.

Solutions and impacts of decision-making

The primary solution was to prioritize the patient’s comfort and dignity by withdrawing burdensome treatments that no longer served his best interests. This approach aligns with the ethical principles of respect for autonomy and beneficence. The impact of this decision included alleviating pain and distress, facilitating a natural death, and supporting the grieving process for the family. It demonstrated respect for the patient’s wishes while maintaining clinical integrity and ethical professionalism.

Moreover, implementing ethical decision-making frameworks fosters trust and accountability in clinical practice. It also underscores the importance of advance care planning to ensure patients’ wishes are respected, reducing moral distress among healthcare providers and families faced with end-of-life decisions. Hopefully, it promotes more widespread adoption of values-based ethics in healthcare policy and training.

Values and ethical theories influencing decision

My personal values heavily influenced my decision. Paramount among these are respect, integrity, and compassion. Respect for my father’s autonomy and dignity guided the choice to honor his wishes about his end-of-life care. Integrity compelled me to act consistently with my moral principles and the legal rights he had expressed through his advance directive. Compassion motivated me to alleviate his suffering and ensure a peaceful, dignified death.

Two ethical theories also shaped my decision. Natural Law Theory stresses acting in accordance with moral laws inherent in human nature, such as the preservation of life and promotion of health. While natural law emphasizes the importance of life, it also recognizes the moral obligation to prevent unnecessary suffering. Accordingly, withdrawing treatment to reduce suffering aligns with this theory, especially when further interventions are futile.

The Theory of Human Rights underscores the intrinsic dignity and rights of every individual, including the right to refuse treatment and to die with dignity. This perspective affirms my decision to respect my father’s human rights, emphasizing that patients retain autonomy over their bodies and life choices, even if they are no longer able to communicate. Together, these theories reinforce the moral legitimacy of the decision.

Impact of ethical principles on decision-making

Key ethical principles—autonomy and veracity—also significantly influenced my decision. Autonomy afforded respect for my father’s prior wishes and his right to self-determination, which I upheld as his surrogate decision-maker. Veracity demanded honesty with myself, the family, and the healthcare team about prognosis and treatment options, facilitating informed consensus. Embracing these principles ensured the decision was ethically sound and morally justified.

Application of ethical problem-solving to future decisions

The structured ethical problem-solving approach provides a valuable framework for future clinical decisions. Its systematic nature encourages comprehensive consideration of all relevant factors—ethical principles, legal standards, factual data, and various perspectives. Applying this methodology enhances consistency, transparency, and moral clarity in decision-making, ultimately leading to better patient outcomes and professional integrity. Regular utilization of such frameworks supports ethical resilience among healthcare providers, fostering a culture of reflective practice and ethical accountability.

References

• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• MacKinnon, B., & Fiala, A. (2018). Natural Law and Human Rights. In Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues (9th ed., pp. 45-67). Cenveo® Publisher Services.
• Scher, S., & Kozlowska, K. (2018). The Elusiveness of Closure. In Rethinking Health Care Ethics. NCBI Bookshelf. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537245/
• Gillon, R. (2015). Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to relational context. BMJ, 309(6948), 184-188.
• American Medical Association. (2020). Code of Medical Ethics. https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics.
• Jonsen, A. R., Siegler, M., & Winslade, W. J. (2010). Clinical Ethics: A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Sulmasy, D. P., & Pellegrino, E. D. (2017). A phenomenological model of moral evidenced-based reasoning. Journal of Medical Ethics, 43(4), 222-229.
• Superka, L., & Frieze, D. (2021). Ethical issues in end-of-life care. Critical Care Nurse, 41(1), 36–44.
• British Medical Association. (2019). Duty of Care: Ethical and Legal Aspects. https://www.bma.org.uk/advice/employment/ethics/ethics-resources
• Valente, S. (2020). End-of-life decision making and medical ethics. Journal of Palliative Care & Medicine, 10(2), e122.