This paper discusses the legal and ethical implications in conjunction with performing surgery on disabled people for social reasons.
Ethical
Katie is immaturity and she has the right like other non-disabled girls to live with her body in tact and she has the same choice to give birth to her own baby. According to the Family Court in Australia and Family Law Act 1975, no person under 18 should have hysterectomy unless the procedures are necessary to prevent serious physical and psychological damage and to save life (Skene, 2008, p. 138).
Medical
This surgery is not medically necessary and it is irreversible, persistent, traumatic and painful that it results in the permanent loss of reproductive capacity. The medical complications …show more content…
This is not just a medical decision for the doctor, but the child’s best interest and the consequences of wrong decision being made.
The facts
It is estimated in Australia that a child is born with cerebral palsy every 15 hours. There is no pre-birth test and no known cure for cerebral palsy (Levitt, 2010, p. 33). Cerebral palsy is a permanent physical condition that affects movement. It effects can be just a weakness from one hand ranging to almost complete lack of movement (Miller & Browne, 2005, p. 51). People with cerebral palsy may have seizures and other impairments that affect their speech, vision, hearing or intellect.
Spastic, Dyskinetic and Ataxic are the three main types of cerebral palsy. A cerebral palsy result from the neurological damage to the child’s developing brain (Miller et al., 2005, p.51). There is greater risk in babies born with low birth weight and preterm. Cerebral palsy can be diagnosed through test reflexes, check for hand preference, CT scan, MRI and …show more content…
52).
Four principles
Autonomy
Autonomy is described as the right to self-determination, the ability to control what happens to us and how we behave (Staunton & Chiarella, 2003, p. 28). This is a significant ethical principle which allows respect for individuals thought, action and their personal space. Katie is believed to understand little of what is said to her but she has no sense of what is happened to her body. Although, she has the right to make her own decision but she could not give valid consent..
Non-maleficence
The principle of ‘above all, do no harm’ ( Pera & Tonder, 2005, p. 34). A strong principle in health care and it forms the basis of nurses’ duty of care. This procedure affects the welfare and health of Katie as it is seriously invasive her personal integrity and human dignity. Health care professionals should avoid emotional, spiritual, moral and physical harm to Katie’s dignity (Pera et al., 2005, p.