Inform Consent Case
The principle issues, in this case are autonomy, proportionality, and beneficence that this committee must examine. The two brothers were in a horrific car accident leaving one paraplegic and the other son possibly needing a lung transplant from his brother. The mother is pressuring Tony the paraplegic son to donate a lung to his brother. She is not waiting to see if his lungs will get better and she is not giving Tony time to recover from this big accident and let him realize what has happened to his body this can have a psychological impact on him. Tony feels like he does not have a choice and that he has to listen to his mother and donate a lung to his brother.
There has to be respected for the autonomy of the donor. Dr. Moore needs to be on Tony’s side and tell him what the risks are with the surgery. Dr. Moore should not be influenced by the mother to put Tony on top of the donor list until he decides himself he wants to be a donor. The mother might have an influence on the doctor because the family contributes to the hospital. It would be unethical to put Tony on top of the transplant list; there are patients waiting for their transplant surgery every day and to take their surgery spot would be unethical. …show more content…
The committee needs implement for Tony and his brother to sign an informed consent.
An informed consent explains the risks and benefits of a procedure to a patient. The inform consent is also based on the moral and legal premise of the patients’ autonomy. The patient has the right to decide if they want to have the procedure. The doctor needs to explain to the brothers what an informed consent is and ensure that they fully understand it before they make the decision. If they both agree to the transplant surgery, further arraignments can be made to schedule the surgery. The committee can have John stay longer on the ventilator and see if his lungs improve, or they can move him on top of the transplant list and but the hospital at a risk of
integrity.
The brothers should not be rushed to do the transplant surgery until they are both stable to go through the surgery. Dr. Moore should not be pressured by the patient’s mother to put Tony on top of the transplant list. He needs to follow the hospital’s rules and procedures and look for the best interest of his patients.
There has to be respected for the autonomy of the donor. Dr. Moore needs to be on Tony’s side and tell him what the risks are with the surgery. Dr. Moore should not be influenced by the mother to put Tony on top of the donor list until he decides himself he wants to be a donor. The mother might have an influence on the doctor because the family contributes to the hospital. It would be unethical to put Tony on top of the transplant list; there are patients waiting for their transplant surgery every day and to take their surgery spot would be unethical. …show more content…
The committee needs implement for Tony and his brother to sign an informed consent.
An informed consent explains the risks and benefits of a procedure to a patient. The inform consent is also based on the moral and legal premise of the patients’ autonomy. The patient has the right to decide if they want to have the procedure. The doctor needs to explain to the brothers what an informed consent is and ensure that they fully understand it before they make the decision. If they both agree to the transplant surgery, further arraignments can be made to schedule the surgery. The committee can have John stay longer on the ventilator and see if his lungs improve, or they can move him on top of the transplant list and but the hospital at a risk of
integrity.
The brothers should not be rushed to do the transplant surgery until they are both stable to go through the surgery. Dr. Moore should not be pressured by the patient’s mother to put Tony on top of the transplant list. He needs to follow the hospital’s rules and procedures and look for the best interest of his patients.