Ethical Issues In Code Of Ethics

168.246 Essay
Various codes and pieces of legislation are available to try to guide nursing conduct, and provide clarification where lines are grey surrounding different areas of practice. This scenario hinges on the experiences of a student nurse on placement and his use of social media in relation to the clinical setting and scenario. Marcus’ post on facebook in regard to the scenario goes against the code of conduct. However there are further ethical issues within this scenario. Two of the other breaches within the scenario occur within the code of rights. Specifically Right one and Right seven Advocating for clients and speaking up when breaches of the clients rights occur in the clinical setting. The role of the nurse in ensuring these
Codes are upheld will be discussed.
The first piece of legislation that will be examined the Code of Conduct.
Principle 6, specifically 6.4; gives nurses guidance on how to treat colleagues. It specifically mentions that one should refrain from discussing colleagues in public places and on social media. Although Marcus is a student nurse, he is within his last year of placement, therefore he should know about and uphold the Code of Conduct. He breaches the code of conduct by posting on social media with his concerns regarding the photography of an unconscious client. Whilst Marcus’ endeavours to improve his practice by questioning how one might advocate for dignity of a client are admirable, he has failed to consider the real life implications of posting on social media. The Code of Conducts purpose is to inform nurses and the public as to what they should expect of a nurse, by extension it is there to ensure that nurses act in a way that does not bring the profession into disrepute. The link can quickly be made between the aforementioned purpose of Code of Conduct and the specific principle that was breached. In posting something on Facebook, no one can or should assume that it remains private. This is quoted by White Paper, as one of the most common misunderstandings surrounding the use of social media. Anything posted anywhere on a social media site can be distributed further and therefore there should be no assumption of privacy made by anyone. When this assumption of privacy is then disregarded it is
easy to see how Marcus’ action could potentially bring the nursing profession into disrepute. Marcus had many other options when it came to acquiring answers, one of these could have been asking his CTA for their perspective.
Marcus posting to facebook also breaches another principle of the code of conduct, principle 5, specifically 5.8. 5.8 outlines how nurses should behave in regards to maintaining confidentiality and privacy for patients.Whilst Marcus’ endeavours to improve his practice by questioning how one might advocate for dignity of a client are admirable, he has failed to consider the real life implications of posting on social media. The nurse-client relationship is built fundamentally upon trust; this trust comes with conditions that include maintaining the privacy and confidentiality of a patient. Simply omitting a name from the post Marcus wrote does not mean that the patient cannot be identified (Henderson & Dahnke, 2015). This once again links back to the concerns of how this will affect the public's trust in nurses, which in turn impacts on how effectively Nurses can do their job.
Informed consent is an important part of the Code of Health and Disability Services consumers’ rights (Code of Rights).
The detail given within right seven is there to ensure that health consumers have given total and informed consent when participating in an medical procedure. Within the aforementioned scenario the patient is unable to give consent. Usually the Code of Rights, under right seven, treatment cannot be given to a consumer without informed consent. This is waived however by a medical emergency. Therefore within this scenario the medical practitioners are allowed to take photos of the client if they feel this is within her best interests, given the fact that this is a medical emergency (Greig, 2000). This does not give student permission to take photos of the patient, especially whilst the women is uncovered. The aforementioned provisions aim was to allow medical interventions to be performed without consent of the patient if they were unable to give consent, and also required it due to a medical emergency. Its intention was not for it to be used as a way of being able to get out of having to obtain consent. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that the medical students breach the code of rights by taking photos of this patient. This patient likely easily come to terms with the fact that the photos taken by medical professionals during the emergency were within her best interest, how is she expected to be accept that the students took photos of her while she was
unconscious, and uncovered.
This same action, when examined as it has been previously, also shows a breach of Right One within the Code of Rights. Right one is to the right to be treated with respect. Within this right consumers are also explicitly granted their right to have their privacy respected. The medical students taking photos of the patient without their consent is a clear violation of this right. It also demonstrates a clear link between the purpose of the Code of Rights which is to ensure to protect and promote the rights of health and disability consumers.