The Patient Autonomy: The Case Of Bobby

In the case of Bobby, the moral issues regarding whether or not Bobby should receive the chemotherapy treatment after going through the process once already, is determined by Autonomy. As a young boy, Bobby may only be thinking of the pain that comes along with chemotherapy and not the outcome that could be life changing. Bobby is practicing his right to Autonomy which is a self-governing act; this allows Bobby to make decisions based on desires that are directed by his own self. Patient autonomy is a simple concept to follow, but it is becoming more challenging to practice, as expectations from the patient and role of the physician is changing, physicians are practicing what is the best course of action in a certain case and ruling out the
Autonomy means to have freedom to make choices regarding issues that may affect one’s life or not. Patients are given the right to exercise this act through self-determination. Autonomy is a human right and it’s the duty of a healthcare provider to respect it. In the case of Bobby, Children’s Aid Society forbid Bobby from exercising his rights and forcefully treated him with chemotherapy against his will and his parents. Not only is Autonomy being exercised in this case, Paternalism is playing apart, where a health care provider and CAS are restricting the act of autonomy, paternalism gives a physician authority in order to protect someone from harm, and this is what had been done in this case. Bobby’s medical desires were disregarded and medical decisions were being made for him as his decisions did not match up with his physicians medical recommendations. Bobby has gone through chemotherapy once, and it caused enough pain where he did not want to experience such thing ever
As far as my parents have taught me, my moral reasoning in this case would be to stand by Bobby’s decision and let him refuse the chemotherapy treatment. Bobby may or may not be given a chance at life again but it’s the quality of life that may not be the same as it once was. Chemotherapy treatments can decrease one's quality of life and it can cause one to obtain other diseases as it reduces the strength of your immune system, along with many more side effects. It is better to live a short but enjoyable life rather than one that is long and problematic. Forcing Bobby to undergo chemotherapy treatments has only caused more pain to him, putting someone’s life in that state is immoral. Whether Bobby was only given an extra five months to live without chemotherapy treatments, he wanted to do so in the peace of his own home. It was morally wrong to stop Bobby’s parents from coming to visit him, his father wanted the best for him and seeing his child almost dying during his last chemotherapy treatment, could not prepare him to go through that all over again. If Bobby was my child, I would do the same thing his father did, and agree with Bobby’s decision as he is cognitive enough to know what is at