Ethic Analysis: Dying With Dignity

Ethic Analysis: Dying with Dignity
Mrs. B has a gastric sarcoma that has metastasized in the liver making the cancer a terminal diagnosis. Mrs. B and her family wish to pursue aggressive treatment, but the doctors believe that the treatments would cause greater harm than good. The problem that presents itself is the terminal diagnosis, since both the diagnosis and the treatment will result in death. The family and the healthcare professionals are faced with a difficult decision. The desired goal in this situation is for the family to obtain enough information to make an educated decision that results in a minimal amount of suffering for Mrs. B. The dilemma in this scenario includes Mrs. B and family and the healthcare professionals.
B before a decision can be made. The benefits of palliative chemotherapy for Mrs. B would be that her life could be prolonged of approximately two months and her quality of life could be increased (Temel et al., 2010, p. 739). Additional benefits would include some symptom control by shrinking the tumor sites, and Mrs. B would be able to have a sense of control over what happens to her (Best et al., 2000, p. 3). The risks of palliative chemotherapy are the high cost of chemotherapy medications and a large amount of support is needed from the family due to complications associated with these drugs. Some of these side effects could include nausea, vomiting, fatigue, gastrointestinal problems and alopecia (Williamson, 2012, pp. 13-14). Another risk would be the prolonged hospital stays (Best et al., 2000, p. 3). The benefits for palliative comfort care with emphasis on pain control would be that Mrs. B could remain in the comfort of her own home. There would also be decreased healthcare costs to the family such as transportation costs and expensive medications. The risks for palliative comfort care would be that some of the pain medications do not always have the desired effect and can result in inadequate pain control (Brorson, Plymoth, Armon, & Bolmsjo, 2014, p. 318). Pain medications can affect patients on an individual basis, so there is the risk
B and her daughters; they are both adamant about wanting to begin aggressive treatment. The nurse finds Mrs. B and her daughters crying together; the youngest daughter, Hannah, states that she has worked so hard to make her mother proud, and she wants her to be there when she graduates. Mrs. B breaks down and states that she knows the reason she got this bad was because she did not take care of herself, but all she wants to do is see her daughter graduate from nursing school. She has worked so hard to put her daughter through school, which is one of the reasons why she was not compliant with treatment. Mrs. B’s dying wish is to see her daughter graduate, not to live forever. The nurse approaches the doctor about holding a multi-disciplinary meeting to try and find alternative solutions for the patient and her family. Two days later, the oncologist, general practitioner, case manager, social worker, pharmacist, and the nurse meet together to talk about what is the next step to take. The oncologist states that it would not be ethical to provide treatment other than palliative care. The nurse interjects to advocate that the patient does not wish to live forever; she only wants to see her daughter graduate. The pharmacist mentions that according to her research findings chemotherapy agents such as Docetaxel can be used as a palliative measure that has shown to prolong life temporarily (Temel et al., 2010, p. 739). It would