What Is Ms. Ag Case
Ms. AG Case Analysis
Paternalism Vs. Autonomy One of the fundamental principles of healthcare ethics is patient autonomy. The struggle, however, is determining how much independence the patient has. Is it appropriately and ethically right to allow an individual to have complete autonomy? Do patients lose their rights when they go to a doctor? Should a Providers do what a sufferer wants or what is in the best interest? As in the case of Ms. AG and the team of health care? If a physician is to do what is in the best interest of their patient, should or should the team of healthcare professional not also consider the consequences of a therapeutic decision on all those affected by the decision on the individual? Central to all these …show more content…
This principle is the basis for the practice of "informed consent" Informed consent is the process by which the provider discloses appropriate information to a competent patient so that the patient can make the voluntary choice to accept or refuse treatment (Appelbaum, 2007). It originates from the legal and ethical right the patient has to do with their body and also the moral duty of the physician to involve their patient healthcare. The dilemma in this situation is whether to go ahead and start the comfort care as prognosed or respect the autonomy of Ms. AG and start the palliative care as …show more content…
In the case of MS AG, her lawyer’s argument that even though she is only 29 years, the density of her bone was related to that of 92 years old person, implies that any act that might force her to eat might result in other complications such as broken bones. Physicians on the other hand being professionals do not make health care decision in a vacuum, their choice is purely base of prognosis and diagnoses. The Physicians diagnosed Ms. AG with the end of life disease which requires at least comfort care. Their decision can be said to the principles of beneficence which gives the providers have to be of a benefit to the patients, as well as to take affirmative steps to prevent and remove harm from the patients. The State has to the duty to provide an equal playground for its citizenry; this could also be an example of Principle of
Paternalism Vs. Autonomy One of the fundamental principles of healthcare ethics is patient autonomy. The struggle, however, is determining how much independence the patient has. Is it appropriately and ethically right to allow an individual to have complete autonomy? Do patients lose their rights when they go to a doctor? Should a Providers do what a sufferer wants or what is in the best interest? As in the case of Ms. AG and the team of health care? If a physician is to do what is in the best interest of their patient, should or should the team of healthcare professional not also consider the consequences of a therapeutic decision on all those affected by the decision on the individual? Central to all these …show more content…
This principle is the basis for the practice of "informed consent" Informed consent is the process by which the provider discloses appropriate information to a competent patient so that the patient can make the voluntary choice to accept or refuse treatment (Appelbaum, 2007). It originates from the legal and ethical right the patient has to do with their body and also the moral duty of the physician to involve their patient healthcare. The dilemma in this situation is whether to go ahead and start the comfort care as prognosed or respect the autonomy of Ms. AG and start the palliative care as …show more content…
In the case of MS AG, her lawyer’s argument that even though she is only 29 years, the density of her bone was related to that of 92 years old person, implies that any act that might force her to eat might result in other complications such as broken bones. Physicians on the other hand being professionals do not make health care decision in a vacuum, their choice is purely base of prognosis and diagnoses. The Physicians diagnosed Ms. AG with the end of life disease which requires at least comfort care. Their decision can be said to the principles of beneficence which gives the providers have to be of a benefit to the patients, as well as to take affirmative steps to prevent and remove harm from the patients. The State has to the duty to provide an equal playground for its citizenry; this could also be an example of Principle of