Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Die SlideShare-Präsentation wird heruntergeladen. ×

Applying the Four Principles Case StudyPart 1 Chart (60 points)B.docx

Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Wird geladen in …3
×

Hier ansehen

1 von 7 Anzeige

Applying the Four Principles Case StudyPart 1 Chart (60 points)B.docx

Herunterladen, um offline zu lesen

Applying the Four Principles: Case StudyPart 1: Chart (60 points)
Based on the “Healing and Autonomy” case study, fill out all the relevant boxes below. Provide the information by means of bullet points or a well-structured paragraph in the box. Gather as much data as possible.

Medical Indications
Beneficence and Nonmaleficence
Patient Preferences
Autonomy
Faster dialysis will end up relieving or reducing high blood pressure as well as fluid buildup of James. James is placed on dialysis due to deteriorating condition. Also he needs the kidney transplant in a year. Samuel, James’s twin brother is the only one regarded as an ideal tissue donor. While conducting the kidney transplant would save the life of James, it will threaten the life of Samuel due to major surgery and losing one kidney (Ghaderi et al. 2018).
The care provider has abided by the parent’s autonomy through permitting them to exercise their spiritual beliefs. The care provider has also agreed to the patient’s faith the spiritual beliefs will restore the health of the patient. Mike the father of the twin thinks that miracle will heal his son as he struggle with the probability of going ahead with surgery. More so, little opinion is aired by Joanne the mother of the twins and this raises eyebrows as why
Quality of Life
Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy
Contextual Features
Justice and Fairness
Medical treatment will help in restoring the kidney functionality of James as well as save his life, however he will experience some discomfort due to the temporary dialysis. Medical treatment should bring James’s renal function to normalcy however; he has not received such treatment as results of autonomy and parent’s decision on depend on faith. This led to continues deterioration of the health condition of the patient. The deteriorating condition will only demand kidney transplant. James is now going to depend on dialysis is which lower the quality of life, because the procedure has to be conducted three times in a week and it is physically draining (Ghaderi et al. 2018). With time he will lose life or undergo kidney transplant.
Having a kidney from Samuel will improve James’s quality of life. Samuel on the other hand will temporary decline in functionality and if he lose the one kidney, he will also require a transplant (Shaha et al. 2018).
If Samuel gives his brother a kidney he will save life of his brother ad not lose hm. He will in turn improve his life .Nomalificience principle is highlighted Mike struggle with the decision of losing one son and putting the other can on a major surgery leading to increased risk of surviving on one kidney (Gracindo et al. 2018).
Mike, the father of the twins wonders and is in dilemma whether it is just or fair to put Samuel through the great ordeal of surgery and go through the risk of having only one kidney. However, given the close relationship between James and Samuel, it would be proper if .

Applying the Four Principles: Case StudyPart 1: Chart (60 points)
Based on the “Healing and Autonomy” case study, fill out all the relevant boxes below. Provide the information by means of bullet points or a well-structured paragraph in the box. Gather as much data as possible.

Medical Indications
Beneficence and Nonmaleficence
Patient Preferences
Autonomy
Faster dialysis will end up relieving or reducing high blood pressure as well as fluid buildup of James. James is placed on dialysis due to deteriorating condition. Also he needs the kidney transplant in a year. Samuel, James’s twin brother is the only one regarded as an ideal tissue donor. While conducting the kidney transplant would save the life of James, it will threaten the life of Samuel due to major surgery and losing one kidney (Ghaderi et al. 2018).
The care provider has abided by the parent’s autonomy through permitting them to exercise their spiritual beliefs. The care provider has also agreed to the patient’s faith the spiritual beliefs will restore the health of the patient. Mike the father of the twin thinks that miracle will heal his son as he struggle with the probability of going ahead with surgery. More so, little opinion is aired by Joanne the mother of the twins and this raises eyebrows as why
Quality of Life
Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy
Contextual Features
Justice and Fairness
Medical treatment will help in restoring the kidney functionality of James as well as save his life, however he will experience some discomfort due to the temporary dialysis. Medical treatment should bring James’s renal function to normalcy however; he has not received such treatment as results of autonomy and parent’s decision on depend on faith. This led to continues deterioration of the health condition of the patient. The deteriorating condition will only demand kidney transplant. James is now going to depend on dialysis is which lower the quality of life, because the procedure has to be conducted three times in a week and it is physically draining (Ghaderi et al. 2018). With time he will lose life or undergo kidney transplant.
Having a kidney from Samuel will improve James’s quality of life. Samuel on the other hand will temporary decline in functionality and if he lose the one kidney, he will also require a transplant (Shaha et al. 2018).
If Samuel gives his brother a kidney he will save life of his brother ad not lose hm. He will in turn improve his life .Nomalificience principle is highlighted Mike struggle with the decision of losing one son and putting the other can on a major surgery leading to increased risk of surviving on one kidney (Gracindo et al. 2018).
Mike, the father of the twins wonders and is in dilemma whether it is just or fair to put Samuel through the great ordeal of surgery and go through the risk of having only one kidney. However, given the close relationship between James and Samuel, it would be proper if .

Anzeige
Anzeige

Weitere Verwandte Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Applying the Four Principles Case StudyPart 1 Chart (60 points)B.docx (20)

Weitere von YASHU40 (20)

Anzeige

Aktuellste (20)

Applying the Four Principles Case StudyPart 1 Chart (60 points)B.docx

  1. 1. Applying the Four Principles: Case StudyPart 1: Chart (60 points) Based on the “Healing and Autonomy” case study, fill out all the relevant boxes below. Provide the information by means of bullet points or a well-structured paragraph in the box. Gather as much data as possible. Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence Patient Preferences Autonomy Faster dialysis will end up relieving or reducing high blood pressure as well as fluid buildup of James. James is placed on dialysis due to deteriorating condition. Also he needs the kidney transplant in a year. Samuel, James’s twin brother is the only one regarded as an ideal tissue donor. While conducting the kidney transplant would save the life of James, it will threaten the life of Samuel due to major surgery and losing one kidney (Ghaderi et al. 2018). The care provider has abided by the parent’s autonomy through permitting them to exercise their spiritual beliefs. The care provider has also agreed to the patient’s faith the spiritual beliefs will restore the health of the patient. Mike the father of the twin thinks that miracle will heal his son as he struggle with the probability of going ahead with surgery. More so, little opinion is aired by Joanne the mother of the twins and this raises eyebrows as why Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy Contextual Features Justice and Fairness Medical treatment will help in restoring the kidney functionality of James as well as save his life, however he will experience some discomfort due to the temporary dialysis. Medical treatment should bring James’s renal function to
  2. 2. normalcy however; he has not received such treatment as results of autonomy and parent’s decision on depend on faith. This led to continues deterioration of the health condition of the patient. The deteriorating condition will only demand kidney transplant. James is now going to depend on dialysis is which lower the quality of life, because the procedure has to be conducted three times in a week and it is physically draining (Ghaderi et al. 2018). With time he will lose life or undergo kidney transplant. Having a kidney from Samuel will improve James’s quality of life. Samuel on the other hand will temporary decline in functionality and if he lose the one kidney, he will also require a transplant (Shaha et al. 2018). If Samuel gives his brother a kidney he will save life of his brother ad not lose hm. He will in turn improve his life .Nomalificience principle is highlighted Mike struggle with the decision of losing one son and putting the other can on a major surgery leading to increased risk of surviving on one kidney (Gracindo et al. 2018). Mike, the father of the twins wonders and is in dilemma whether it is just or fair to put Samuel through the great ordeal of surgery and go through the risk of having only one kidney. However, given the close relationship between James and Samuel, it would be proper if Samuel would have provides the kidney to his brother instead of losing him. Further, the opinion and thoughts of their father is taking center stage. Joanne’s feelings are not also acknowledged on the matter. Another thing that raises eyebrows is whether, Mike has right to place Samuel’s life primarily in his faith (Tilburt, Pacyna, & Rusthoven, 2020). ©2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Part 2: Evaluation Answer each of the following questions about how principlism would be applied: 1. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the
  3. 3. Christian worldview, which of the four principles is most pressing in this case? Explain why. (45 points) Based on the Christian perspective autonomy is the pressing principle in this particular scenario. Autonomy has to do with letting the patient decide or make choices related to their treatment in regard to their experiences, values as well as beliefs. Autonomy is demonstrated by mike when they decide not to go ahead with the surgery due to the moving sermon they had experienced in church thus, taking their son to healing services. The parent has therefore decided to let faith take its course (Shaha et al. 2018). Later the condition worsened. Autonomy plays a key role as the father struggle with the possibility of going ahead with surgery and putting Samuel at risk. The principle of justice is also crucial at this point when mike figures out if it would be fair to put the o through Samuel through ordeal of surgery. He is undecided and only hope that the son to be healed through faith. In healthcare sector, the principle of autonomy is always considered and care providers are supposed to abide by or respect the decision made by the patient. If the patient is not fully autonomous in making choices in regard to medical treatment the care provider has duty to let the patient participate in medical decisions in relation to consequences of the choices or decision made (Shaha et al. 2018). Religious objection has a very strong foundation in the legal precedent in constitution. It can be challenging for any curt to justify where when the patient or parents refuse medication for intention a that are not founded on the recognized religion. However, where the spiritual treatment the quality of life of the patient the patient autonomy may be excluded (Tilburt, Pacyna, & Rusthoven, 2020). 2. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian rank the priority of the four principles? Explain why. (45 points) In regard to Christian perspective, the Christian would run
  4. 4. the importance or priority of the four principles in relation to faith. Western medicine was commenced by Judeo-Christian and the Greco-Roman heritage (Gracindo et al. 2018). Further in relation to principles of medical ethics there are different principles of the medical ethics comprising of moral code, doctor, patient relationship, nomalificience, moral justification, autonomy, justice and beneficence. There are only four principles named in the biomedical ethics including non- maleficence, justice, beneficence and autonomy. In regard to the Christian world view, the four principles would rank in the following manner. Autonomy will be the most prioritized principle to Christians. The respect for free is one of the most crucial topic in the biblical doctrine together with the interaction among human beings and GOD (Tilburt, Pacyna, & Rusthoven, 2020). In the book of genesis, a man is newly created and then given freedom to make choices. The man is given choices to follow commandment and not eat from the tree of knowledge because he would die in the process. Therefore God created and also respected the free will. Therefore, the work of care provider is to inform ad and then respect the choices made by the parents or patients. Non maleficence principle comes second where the care provide has the moral obligation not to cause harm to patient. Beneficence comes second and it is clearly stated in the bible that “love your neighbor as you love yourself” (Tilburt, Pacyna, & Rusthoven, 2020). The care providers should focus on benefiting others. Justice has to do with treating people with fairness and distributing resources equally. Therefore, the biblical law outlines how people should treat one another in spite of having diverse race and religion. All patients should be treated with compassion and dignity. References: Ghaderi, A., Malek, F., Mohammadi, M., Maskopaii, S. R., Hamta, A., & Madani, S. A. (2018). Adherence to principles of medical ethics among physicians in Gracindo, G. C. L., da Silva Gallo, J. H., & Nunes, R. (2018).
  5. 5. Threats to bioethical principles in medical practice in Brazil: new medical ethics code period. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 51(5). Shaha, K. K., Patra, A. P., Chaudhari, V. A., Das, S., & Das, S. K. (2018). A review on Applications of Principles of Medical Ethics in the Practice of Surgery. South-East Asian Journal of Medical Education, 12(1). Tilburt, J., Pacyna, J., & Rusthoven, J. (2020). Christian Integrity Regained: Reformational Worldview Engagement for Everyday Medical Practice. Christian bioethics: Non- Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality. mazandaran province, iran. Archives of Iranian medicine, 21(1), 19. Case Study: Healing and Autonomy Mike and Joanne are the parents of James and Samuel, identical twins born 8 years ago. James is currently suffering from acute glomerulonephritis, kidney failure. James was originally brought into the hospital for complications associated with a strep throat infection. The spread of the A streptococcus infection led to the subsequent kidney failure. James’s condition was acute enough to warrant immediate treatment. Usually cases of acute glomerulonephritis caused by strep infection tend to improve on their own or with an antibiotic. However, James also had elevated blood pressure and enough fluid buildup that required temporary dialysis to relieve. The attending physician suggested immediate dialysis. After some time of discussion with Joanne, Mike informs the physician that they are going to forego the dialysis and place their faith in God. Mike and Joanne had been moved by a sermon their pastor had given a week ago, and also had
  6. 6. witnessed a close friend regain mobility when she was prayed over at a healing service after a serious stroke. They thought it more prudent to take James immediately to a faith healing service instead of putting James through multiple rounds of dialysis. Yet, Mike and Joanne agreed to return to the hospital after the faith healing services later in the week, and in hopes that James would be healed by then. Two days later the family returned and was forced to place James on dialysis, as his condition had deteriorated. Mike felt perplexed and tormented by his decision to not treat James earlier. Had he not enough faith? Was God punishing him or James? To make matters worse, James's kidneys had deteriorated such that his dialysis was now not a temporary matter and was in need of a kidney transplant. Crushed and desperate, Mike and Joanne immediately offered to donate one of their own kidneys to James, but they were not compatible donors. Over the next few weeks, amidst daily rounds of dialysis, some of their close friends and church members also offered to donate a kidney to James. However, none of them were tissue matches. James’s nephrologist called to schedule a private appointment with Mike and Joanne. James was stable, given the regular dialysis, but would require a kidney transplant within the year. Given the desperate situation, the nephrologist informed Mike and Joanne of a donor that was an ideal tissue match, but as of yet had not been considered—James’s brother Samuel. Mike vacillates and struggles to decide whether he should have his other son Samuel lose a kidney or perhaps wait for God to do a miracle this time around. Perhaps this is where the real testing of his faith will come in? Mike reasons, “This time around it is a matter of life and death. What could require greater faith than that?” © 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

×