Ethical Health Care Issues Essay

Health sustainment ethics involves fashioning well researched and considerate decisions just aboutwhat wellness check callments, while taking into circumstance a patient ofs beliefs and wishes regarding altogether aspects of their health. The healthc be industry, above either other, has a high regard for the issues surrounding the welf ar of their patients. This power everywhere a patients well universe creates a mandatory pick out for all health business organisation organizations to develop an ethics committee. The committees endeavor is to establish a written code of ethics that details the policies and procedures that do proper conduct for all employees. There be many honest issues that whitethorn arise in regards to a patients healthc ar.Treating patients with authorized religious beliefs pose important good issues in the field of healthcare. This base will describe an ethical health care issue concerning refusal of care, such as a affinity transfusion. It w ill cover the four ethical principles as they apply to healthcare providers and patients rights. It is important that health care workers consent a rudimentary understanding of masters attestatores philosophy about business line transfusion so that as professionals we understructure be proactive in their management.Ethical Health Care IssueIn all areas of practice, docs come into contact with Jehovahs Witnesses and their refusal to wear origin transfusion, so far when it means saving their lives. The Jehovahs Witness faith creates more or less take exceptions for physicians caring for its members. The ethical principles of autonomy versus beneficence come into conflict when a physician believes a transfusion is in the best interest of the patient, scarcely the patient refuses. Legal precedence provides a backdrop. In addition, Panico, Jenq, & Brewster (2011) article states, thither was a case involving a woman who had consented for examination of a fibroid tumor under an esthesia, but withheld consent for removal of thetumor. While sedated, she underwent resection of the tumor that lead to complications. She sued and the judge ruled in her favor, establishing the notion that every human being should have the right to decide what is done with his or her take body. Moreover, this inaugurate gave any individual the right to refuse treatment if he or she understands the risks a Jehovahs Witness has the right to refuse a blood transfusion.This ruling set a precedent for informed consent. In 1990, the Canadian case of Malette v Shulman described an emergency department physician who gave a blood transfusion to an unconscious patient who was in hypovolaemic shock. Per report, the patient had a signed wallet card that identified her as a Jehovahs Witness, although it was undated and unwitnessed. The wallet card, is considered a lawful document which, stated that she did not want to receive a blood transfusion under any circumstances (Lantos, Matlock, & Wendler, 2011). Furthermore, when the patients missy arrived and asked that the transfusion be stopped, the physician did not comply. The physician argued that there was no way of knowing if the patient had changed her mind in the minutes in the beginning the car accident and thus he was duty bound to pull round her life (Lantos, Matlock, & Wendler, 2011). The court found the physician guilty of battery.Although it is easy to honk on emotion to argue against the ruling in this case, the verdict has not been overturned. This case illustrates the current teaching to todays physicians, who are taught to view patients autonomy and preferences for their own bodies (Lantos, Matlock, & Wendler, 2011). Jehovahs Witness have been known to refuse transfusions with packed red blood cells to treat their life-threatening diseases. medical exam professionals mustiness consider patient has autonomy of thought, intention, and sue when making decisions regarding health care procedures. To c omply with patients wishes medical professionals could offer fresh frozen plasma and platelets as an resource. Furthermore, Jehovahs Witnesses number over one million in the United States and at least six million worldwide. Witnesses believe in strict and real interpretation of the Bible, which leads them to reject some aspects of modern medical care (Doyle, 2002).Medical professionals have discussed in open forums ethical decisions they are required to wanton while taking care of a dying patient who ref employ to acknowledge a blood transfusion. Data suggests they struggled to relate to someone who would take some blood products, butnot others, and who are willing to risk termination over a red blood cell transfusion. Refusal of blood transfusions became vulgar practice only after a 1945 church decision (Mann, Votto, & Kambe, 1992). Indeed, Jehovahs Witnesses interpret these sections of the Bible differently and if a member accepts blood into their veins, they are shunned and forfeit their membership in the faith community and aeonian life. The society had enforced shunning and social isolation by Witnesses own family members, relatives, and friends, finally leading to expulsion from the religion (Doyle, 2002).Similarly, research suggest that the health care provider must consider four main areas when evaluating nicety and the four areas are fair distribution of scarce resources, competing needs, rights and obligations, and strength conflicts with naturalised legislation (Gillon, 1994). In considering the many ethical dilemmas associated with Jehovahs Witnesses and their refusal to accept blood transfusion have medical professionals focusing on the shipway in which treatments or interventions violates accepted norms of conduct of social science research. Physicians must be aware of the growing diversity of values and beliefs among Jehovahs Witnesses. Some of the most intractable ethical problems arise from conflicts among principles and the necess ity of concern one off against the other. The balancing of such principles in concrete situations is the ultimate ethical act (House, 1993, p. 168).Evaluation involves at least four levels of social-political interaction- with governing body and other agency policy makers who commission evaluation. Evaluation has to operate in this multilayered context of different interests, providing information to inform decisions while remaining supreme of the policies and programs themselves (House, 1993, p. 170). More importantly, the weight of ethical judgment is thus put on experimental research to justify meeting ethical standards (Panico, Jenq, & Brewster, 2011). Resource storage allocation is a major issue that physicians are confronted with when dealing with Jehovahs Witness allocation. Beneficence requires that the procedure be provided with the intent of doing good for the patient involved. As described above if a patient refuses a blood transfusion and opt for an alternative proce dure that costs more it can prove problematic (Panico, Jenq, & Brewster, 2011).When society thinks of the greater good, this argument poses a challenge to the principles of patient autonomy that we also value. In a society in which medical resourcesare costly, benefits will always need to be weighed against the potential cost to both the patient and society thus creating ethical challenges. Finally, the care of a Jehovahs Witness with life threatening illnesses requires a multidisciplinary and planned approach. These patients suffer with certain diseases and are often anemic and must be prepared to deal with this issue in both outpatient settings and during an knowing crisis. Clinicians must view each patient as an individual who may have varying thoughts about transfusions of the multiple different blood products that are available. Therefore, medical practices today need to continue to open early lines of communication with these patients.Providing adequate information and edu cating the patient about realities and obtaining informed consent sooner subjecting a patient to any test, procedure, or surgery is very essential. It is brisk to the optimal care of a Jehovahs Witness patient. It is inevitable that dialysis unit nurses and social workers have conversations with patients about their beliefs on blood products. Discussing a patients wishes, understanding their basis for these decisions, and discussing risks, benefits, and alternatives that can be used in both emergent and non-emergent situations is crucial to preparing for more urgent situations, when these conversations often are not possible.ConclusionsTo many Jehovahs Witnesses, the consequences of accepting a blood transfusion can be worse than death itself. non every Jehovahs Witness patient abides by the same(p) beliefs regarding the acceptance of blood products. These patients can be managed through careful proviso and open lines of communication between physicians and patients. Understand ing the premise behind the beliefs of patients who are Jehovahs Witnesses is critical to beginning conversations and truly understanding the patient. Ultimately, when a patient establishes what they will accept, as clinicians, ethically we must optimize the care we provide within their wishes about blood products. Frequent and open dialogue is essential for enhancing care for a Jehovahs Witness.As an alternative to violating a patients autonomy some physicians and some hospitals are more comfortable with bloodless procedures and patients can be referred to these centers if necessary for specialness care. Overall, health care professionals should be able to provideethical health care to patients who are Jehovahs Witnesses at any hospital or community office, but must continue to be meliorate and aware of their beliefs and respect their wishes and the impact these may have on organizing and providing their care. If these considerations are neglected one can surely expect ethical br eaches or dilemmas as inevitable.ReferencesDoyle D. Blood transfusions and the Jehovahs Witness patient. Am J Ther. 20029(5)417424. Gillon, R. (1994). Informed consent an ethical obligation or legal compulsion. Retrieved from http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2840885/ House, R. (1993). ethical motive in evaluation. Retrieved from http//www.uk.sagepub.com/gray3e/study/chapter12/Book%20chapters/Ethics_in_Evaluation.pdf168-170. Lantos J, Matlock A, Wendler D. Clinician integrity and limits to patient autonomy. JAMA.2011305(5)495499. (Lantos, Matlock, & Wendler, 2011). Mann M, Votto J, Kambe J, McNamee M. Management of the in earnest anemic patient who refuses transfusion lessons learned during the care of the Jehovahs Witness. Ann Intern Med. 1992117(12)10421048. Panico, M. L., Jenq, G. Y., & Brewster, U. C. (2011). When a patient refuses life-saving care. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 58(4), 647-653.