Fertility Case Study

Abstract

This case study focuses on ethical consequences of the scenario. It also assesses the risks involved and attempts to offer a solution to the problem in the scenario. Without the knowledge of his patients, a doctor in a fertility clinic uses his own sperm during his procedures to inseminate the said patients. It would also be prudent to note that he violates an employees obligation to legal and ethical justice by issuing threats to her. To a large extent, the parties involved in such cases are subjected to years of pain and trauma. The scenario has specific focus on patients who are deprived of their rights in such clinical settings. As a consequence of the doctors actions, children are likely to be exposed to health conditions that would have been avoided. Milunsky (n. d) points out that family history is important in screening and prevention of a disease. The case study features the principles of biomedical ethics which are inclusive of, but they are not limited to; being truthful, respecting autonomy and doing no harm. It also highlights how the said principles advance the rights of patients (Madeira, 2020). The author further points out that since loopholes exist in legislation, it would be prudent to pass a fertility bill. This bill ordinarily ensures that the affected patients can hold doctors accountable for such an offence.

Introduction

This case study focuses on a fertility clinic doctor (Dr. H) who is involved in what could be described as an ethical blunder. The said doctor uses his own sperm to conduct a several couples who are unaware of what is transpiring. Later on, one of his employees (Mary) finds out what this particular doctor has been up tp. Dr. H threatens her with job loss and also makes it known to her that he will ensure that she does not find any other form of employment elsewhere. It would be prudent to note that Mary cannot afford to lose the job since she had relocated not long ago so as to be with her mother who was unwell. A few weeks later, Mary reports Dr. H to the state licensing board. She does not identify herself while filing the said deport. To her surprise, she finds out that the doctor relocated to another state with his family. To a large extent, this case study will examine...…that they have to commit to in terms of their patients rights. The said patients, as Madeira (2020) points out, have the right to receive gametes that have been screened appropriately to confirm donor identity and physical resemblance. The physicians also have to ensure that their patients are free from certain genetic diseases that happen to be transmittable. In our present case, Dr. H can be legally punished since he also deprived the employee of her legal and ethical duty of reporting misconduct.

Conclusion

The actions of Dr. H on his employee (Mary) and to other patients have legal and ethical implications. The occurrences should have being reported by Mary at the state licensing board. Although there exists various loopholes in the state laws, this largely appears to be the only cause of action for such unethical behavior. There may also be need to perform genetic tests on Dr. Hs patients, after they are notified of what has been taking place at the doctors clinic, so that the relevant corrective measures can be undertaken. It would also be necessary to provide individual and family therapy to address the emotional trauma. Madeira (2020) suggests that a fraud bill should be passed with such…