Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Nursing and Ethical Choices
What are the utilitarian and Kantian justifications for Advance Directives?
The health care proxy and the living will are two ways in which a patient can express advance directives relating to health care and/or end of life treatment should that person become incapacitated. The utilitarian justification for advance directives is that the end justifies the means, or in other words the greatest good for the greatest number of people. If an advanced directive is given, it covers all the people involved and lets the patient's wishes be known ahead of time in case there comes a moment when the patient can speak for him or herself. The doctors and care givers will be obliged to accept this as the greatest good, because it relieves them of any duty to give care (if the directive has in place that it should be refused) and vice-versa. The Kantian justification for advanced directives is that it respects the autonomous position, that is, the individual right to refuse treatment (should that be the case). The individual makes it known ahead of time in the living will, for example, and this is respected as Kantian philosophy upholds autonomy as a basic right.
2. Why do clinicians still struggle to practice full disclosure of medical error? Explain briefly the key elements of disclosure.
Disclosure involves stating everything that went wrong with a medical error to the patient,...
Indeed, this can often be problematic because it can be simpler just to correct the error and lie to the patient without the patient becoming any the wiser. From a utilitarian perspective this behavior would be justified, but not from a Kantian perspective. For the sake of integrity and ethical treatment, it is in the interest of the doctor to disclose fully any medical error, even if it is easily remedied, no harm will result and it requires length explanation to the patient. This will help avoid future litigation which can be much more costly in terms of time and moneyu (Gallagher, n.d.)
Thus, as Philipsen and Soeken (2011) note, it is the clincian's duty and ethical responsibility to inform the patient of any medical error in treatment, even if the error is "insignificant." The patient still has a right to know, as do all individuals who are impacted by the error (staff as well). This allows the medical community to remain transparent, which is a foundation of trust in the staff-patient relationship. Thus, the ethical implications of disclosure and non-disclosure are clear: to not disclose a medical error is to act unethically and without the transparency and loyalty that is owed the patient as well as the members of the staff. The legal implications of disclosure vs. non-disclosure are also clear. The severity of the error is what is most likely to affect the outcome…
References
Edwin, A. K. (2010). Non-disclosure of medical errors an egregious violation of ethical principles. Ghana Medical Journal, 43(1): 34-39.
Gallagher, Thomas H. "A 62-Year-old Woman with Skin Cancer Who Experienced
Wrong-Site Surgery." (CIB, 65-71)
Philipsen, N. C., Soeken, D. (2011). Preparing to blow the whistle: A survival guide for nurses. The Journal for Nurse Practicioners, 7(9): 740-746.
In 2001, the trial court judge stated that clear and convincing confirmation demonstrated that Ms. Schiavo would have selected not to be given life-prolonging action beneath the conditions that were present. This decision was also confirmed by the Florida appeals court and the family was deprived of a hearing by the Florida Supreme Court. When Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was taken out for the second time, in 2003, the Florida
Right to Die For the last few decades, the issue of a person's right to choose the time and method of his or her own death has been one of passionate debate in the United States, with emotions running high on both sides of the controversy as the meanings of liberty and freedom of choice, the morality of taking one's own life, the ethics of people involved in such actions, and
right to die. The writer uses analytical skills to dissect and argue several right to die cases that have been presented in court in America. The writer discusses the ethics of the practice as well as presents ideas about the future "right to die" arguments and cases. There were eight sources used to complete this paper. Through the advances of medical science people are living longer than ever before. Those
Right to Die Cases The very public, legal and ultimately political saga of Terri Schiavo brought not only national but international attention to the right to die issues and echoed a similar battle which took place some fifteen years earlier concerning Nancy Cruzan. In "Cruzan, by her Parents and Co-Guardians v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, 497 U.S. 261,' the United States Supreme Court concurred with the lower court's ruling on June
Right to Die Physician-Assisted Suicide The case of Mildred D: The right to die The core dilemma of 'the right to die' of Mildred D. revolves around Mildred's alleged statement to her children that she wanted no heroic means to continue her life. There is also the question of whether intravenous feeding is 'heroic' means, since removing the NG will effectively 'starve' her and ending her life before it would naturally terminate were
Cruzan Case through a variety of medical ethical perspectives The Consequentialist Paradigm The ethical paradigm of consequentialism, as its name suggests, is the view that "normative properties," in other words, ethical actions in the world, should be judged upon and "depend only" upon their resultant consequences. (Sinnott-Armstrong, 2003) The Nancy Cruzan case is famous legal a 'right to die' case whereby, after Nancy Cruzan was almost killed in a car crash,