Essay Example on Healing & Autonomy: Filling Out Relevant Boxes

Based on the "Healing and Autonomy" case study, fill out all the relevant boxes below. Provide the information by means of bullet points or a well-structured paragraph in the box. Gather as much data as possible.

Medical Indications

Beneficence and Nonmaleficence Patient Preferences

Autonomy

The Principle of beneficence holds that the healthcare provider has the responsibility of ensuring that the patient benefits in all the situations (Ediger, 2015). The treatment procedures that are recommended must be of good to the patients, and hence they should maintain a high level of knowledge and skills. They should also be knowledgeable on the current and best medical practices, as well as considering the circumstances of an individual patient, putting in mind that what might of benefit to one patient not apply to the other (Lawrence, 2007).

The health provider, in this case, has passed James's condition, and based on his professional training he recommends that he undergoes temporary dialysis to relieve the fluid buildup. This according to him, will stabilize him as he prepares him for other medical procedures. He knows that the kidney of the patient has already failed and other medical procedures including administration with an antibiotic would not work, as earlier diagnosis and treatment did not clear the throat infection. The physician, in this case, knows that with dialysis, James's symptoms would improve.

Nonmaleficence insists that, no harm should be done, and that the end goal of any medical personnel's decision is to consider where other people in the society could be harmed by the decision taken, even if the individual patient may benefit from it (Lawrence, 2007). James requires a kidney transplant within a year according to the physician attending to him. The donors including his parents and the church members are not compatible. The only available person who can donate the kidney is his twin brother, Samuel. His dad Mike, struggles to decide on the issue as he is torn between waiting for God to do a miracle and letting his other son donate the kidney to his brother. This affects him even with a great possibility that both his sons have high levels of survival. The principle of autonomy maintains that the patient has the right to retain control over his or her body (Ediger, 2015). The health professionals can only advise on the best options available, but any attempts to persuade the patient to make a decision violates the principle.

Based on this principle, the physician can only advise on the best available options of ensuring James's condition improve and it is up to his parents to decide on whether to go through with what the physician recommends or wait for a miracle from God. Kidney transplant is the only available option to ensure James survives according to the nephrologist, as regular dialysis would only prolong his kidney function for a year. The decision of making his twin the ultimate donor is also up to James's parents to decide.

Quality of Life

Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy Contextual Features

Justice and Fairness

The quality of life that James would enjoy is highly dependent on the clinicians, the parents and the society in general. The three principles above dictate James's recovery plan after a year of dialysis. The clinician based on his expertise believes that a kidney transplant is best for James, but it compromises his brother's chance to enjoy a high quality of life as it means that he will have one kidney.

On the other hand, his father is in a dilemma as his ultimate decision will put his faith to test. He is torn between believing in miracles and considering the clinical interventions that the physician and nephrologist suggest. Also, society may not take it lightly that he will compromise the life of his other son, over James.

It is certain that there is a higher chance for both of them to survive, but their quality of life may reduce especially for Samuel who is considered innocent in this case. The clinicians predict a higher chance of survival for James should the transplant proceed, but his dad is the ultimate key for that to happen. It is only just and fair that James does not undergo any more pain and suffering due to complications brought about by acute glomerulonephritis, kidney failure. However, this can only be so, if there is a balance on autonomy, beneficence, and Nonmaleficence. The clinician, his parents, and society must decide what is best for James in this context, which is the ultimate recovery.

James does not deserve long term suffering that includes dialysis for a year, while a professional health specialist knows that the only solution is a kidney transplant. His donor is at his disposal, and he can survive normally with one kidney. Mike knows that the life of his son is in his hands, and he has to make a difficult decision of either keeping him alive or see him endure suffering.

Part 2: Evaluation

Answer each of the following questions about how principalism would be applied:

In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, which of the four principles is most pressing in this case? Explain why. (45 points)

The principle of beneficence is the most pressing in this case. Through the examples from the teachings of Christ, he demonstrates how we can care for those who are suffering. The parable of the good Samaritan teaches a Christian on beneficence, which is the act of helping others (Shelly & Miller, 2009). The healthcare personnel is called to care for others hence there is a need for them to be compassionate and perform acts of mercy, kindness, and charity by aiding the injured and the sick, the dying as well as relieving pain and suffering as in the case of James from the case study. Healthcare professionals need to do everything in their power, knowledge, and skills to ensure that patients get the best form of care thus relieving them from suffering (Meilaender, 2013).

The Bible also forbids Christians from tempting God. Jesus sets an example, by not throwing himself from the tower when Satan asks him to. In the case study, Mike ignores the advice from the physician and chooses to go for faith healing services. However, following the service, the health condition of his son deteriorates and it tests his faith. Jesus in this example demonstrates that we must do our part as Christians before the will of God is done (Shelly & Miller, 2009). Physicians are experts, and they are a gift from God, to relieve human suffering on earth, therefore, it is the role of Mike to follow the physician's instruction because they have the desired knowledge and expertise to diagnose James's condition.

In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian rank the priority of the four principles? Explain why. (45 points)

Ranking of the four principles should originate from our Christian beliefs based on the Biblical teachings. The bible, through the ten commandments, demands us to love neighbors as ourselves and doing to others, what we desire to be done to us (Meilaender, 2013). These guiding Biblical principles should aid the ethical decisions given the dilemmas that we may face. Life is sacred because we have been given the breath of life by God. The teaching of Jesus and His value for His life should guide Christians on ranking the principles (Meilaender, 2013).

Jesus cried tears of blood demonstrating how suffering is painful. He asked God, to even relieve him from it because he knew exactly what was awaiting him. As humans, we are bound to suffer, but as Christian, we must relieve the suffering of others. The acts of autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence, test our ethical limits as Christians. We must rely on the teachings of Christ, and the Lord's commandments to judge a situation, and not merely applying our carnal mind.

References

Ediger, M. J. (2015). Teaching clinical ethics using the four topic method. International Journal of Athletic Therapy and Training, 20(6), 10-13.

Lawrence, D. J. (2007). The four principles of biomedical ethics: a foundation for current bioethical debate. Journal of Chiropractic Humanities, 14, 34-40.

Meilaender, G. (2013). Bioethics: A primer for Christians. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.

Shelly, J. A., & Miller, A. B. (2009). Called to care: A Christian worldview for nursing. InterVarsity Press.