Week 8 Assignment Ethical Dilemma Brief Introduction Health

Week 8 Assignmentethical Dilemma Briefintroductionhealth Care Administ

Week 8 Assignment ethical Dilemma Brief introduction health Care Administ

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Health care administrators frequently encounter complex ethical dilemmas that require careful navigation of moral, legal, and organizational considerations. In the rapidly evolving landscape of healthcare, ethical decision-making is critical to ensuring patient rights, maintaining professional integrity, and upholding organizational standards. This paper explores a significant physician-patient ethical dilemma, analyzes it through ethical and moral lenses, and proposes a justified resolution rooted in ethical principles.

Selection of Ethical Dilemma

The ethical dilemma chosen involves a scenario where a physician must decide whether to withhold life-sustaining treatment from a terminally ill patient who has expressed a desire to avoid prolonged suffering, despite the family's insistence on continuing aggressive treatment. This scenario reflects key issues such as patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and family authority, making it a compelling case for ethical analysis.

Case Overview

The patient, Mr. A, is an 80-year-old man diagnosed with advanced metastatic cancer. He has explicitly stated in prior consultations that he wishes to forgo aggressive treatments and prefers comfort care. However, his family members, particularly his adult children, request that all possible interventions be attempted to extend his life, citing emotional reasons and hope for a miraculous recovery. The physician faces the challenge of respecting Mr. A's autonomous wishes while managing the family's concerns and emotional distress.

Application of Ethical Theories

Deontological Ethics

From a deontological perspective, the physician has a duty to honor the patient's autonomous decisions, as respecting patient autonomy is a fundamental ethical obligation in healthcare (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). This perspective emphasizes duty over consequences, asserting that honoring Mr. A's expressed wishes is ethically obligatory regardless of familial pressure.

Utilitarian Ethics

Utilitarianism evaluates the decision based on outcomes, aiming to maximize overall well-being. Continuing aggressive treatment when its benefits are limited and likely to cause additional suffering may lead to a net decrease in overall happiness and quality of life, thus suggesting that withholding treatment aligns with the principle of minimizing harm (Sandel, 2010).

Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics emphasizes moral character and virtues such as compassion, honesty, and wisdom. A virtuous physician would prioritize honesty about prognosis, compassion for both the patient and family, and wisdom in balancing these considerations to decide on the ethically appropriate course of action (Hursthouse & Pettigrove, 2018).

Ethical Concerns and Potential Outcomes

The primary ethical concern revolves around respecting patient autonomy versus beneficence and non-maleficence. Respecting Mr. A's wishes supports autonomy, whereas continuing treatment may violate his expressed desire and potentially cause unnecessary suffering. Potential outcomes include honoring his choices, which might lead to family disappointment and potential conflicts, or continuing treatment, which may prolong suffering and consume resources without meaningful benefit.

Another critical concern involves legal implications, as refusal of treatment by competent patients is legally protected. However, family members' preferences may conflict with the patient's rights, leading to ethical and legal dilemmas that require sensitive navigation.

Proposed Solution and Ethical Justification

The optimal approach involves engaging in open, honest communication with both the patient and his family. The physician should reaffirm Mr. A's wishes through documented advance directives and ensure the family understands the patient's values and preferences. Employing a multidisciplinary ethics consultation can facilitate consensus and provide additional support.

From an ethical standpoint, respecting autonomy is paramount, especially when the patient is competent and has clearly articulated his desires. The principle of beneficence supports providing comfort measures that align with the patient's wishes, avoiding futile or harmful interventions. Non-maleficence further underscores the obligation to prevent unnecessary suffering.

This approach also adheres to the principles of respect for persons and justice, ensuring that the patient's rights are prioritized without disregarding the emotional needs of his family. In the context of organizational policies, documenting all discussions and decisions ensures legal protection and transparency.

Conclusion

Handling ethical dilemmas in healthcare demands a nuanced understanding of ethical principles, legal protections, and interpersonal communication. In this scenario, prioritizing patient autonomy, supported by comprehensive communication and ethical consultation, offers a pathway to ethically sound decision-making. Such approaches not only respect individual rights but also promote trust and integrity within healthcare organizations.

References

  • Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2013). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (7th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Hursthouse, R., & Pettigrove, G. (2018). Virtue ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/
  • Sandel, M. J. (2010). Justice: What's the right thing to do? Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  • American Medical Association. (2020). Code of Medical Ethics. https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/code-medical-ethics
  • Levine, A. (2017). Ethical issues in end-of-life care. Journal of Medical Ethics, 43(9), 575-580.
  • Jonsen, A. R., Siegler, M., & Winslade, W. J. (2010). Clinical Ethics (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Faden, R. R., Beauchamp, T. L., & Kingsbury, P. (2013). A History and Theory of Informed Consent. Oxford University Press.
  • Gillon, R. (2015). Ethics in medicine. Oxford University Press.
  • Pinch, T. J., & Collins, H. M. (2013). Making Science: Between Nature and Society. University of Chicago Press.
  • Brody, H. (2014). The ethics of clinical research. JAMA, 312(8), 787-788.

Related Assignments