When it comes to treating yourself and others, there are various advantages and disadvantages of medical intervention. Clinical ethics is essential when addressing medical dilemmas because it entails treating patients ethically and respecting their autonomy. Medical indications are specified when implemented so that the doctor can establish a diagnosis and prescribe the most effective therapy if the patient agrees with the doctor’s recommendations. However, case management may be hampered if a patient has moral objections to a doctor’s suggested course of treatment. Therefore, finding rapid and efficient solutions to ethical problems is crucial.
The advantages, connections, and significance of medical indications and ethical principles are defined in this part of the reading. Additionally, issues in clinical medicine such as medical mistake, medical judgment and ambiguity, and the advantages of medicine are covered. Three ethical concerns are taken into account while examining the aforementioned points: nonbeneficial, cardiopulmonary and determination of death (Jonsen et al., 2015, p. 10).
Medical indicators, which are interpretations, views, and facts that provide appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic actions and understanding goals for medicine, are the final result of prevention and treatment for those who are ill or damaged. The discussion of clinical medicine starts with a statement of medical evidence. It is better to consider it a medical intervention that includes patient consultations, goal setting, and suggestions when working on medical incidences. Medical indicators comprise diagnosis, education, treatments, therapy, and psychological and physiological data about a patient.
The Ethical Principles of Beneficence and Nonmaleficence is a Medical Indication that discusses activities that physicians engage in on a regular basis when caring for patients. Many medical professionals appeal to the Hippocratic Oath, which states, “I will use treatment to benefit the sick according to my ability and judgment but never with a view to injury and wrongdoing,” when selecting the appropriate course of action (Jonsen et al., 2015, p. 10). People can benefit in various ways, such as via education, employment, and promotion of employees, providing recommendations, or offering gifts. However, there are also more ways to hurt someone, such as by stealing, assaulting, or slandering them (Jonsen et al., 2015, p. 10). Benefit and harm in medicine have a special meaning: aiding by attempting to relieve a person of the burden of sickness and its accompanying pain, misery, and loss of function as safely as possible. When it comes to medical ethics, beneficence is defined as bringing about betterment in mental and physical health; this influences therapeutic acts and diagnostic procedures. Non-beneficence in this context refers to mitigating risk and avoiding harm.
Benefits to Risk Ratio can put it up so that it helps the doctor without harming the patient. However, this does not guarantee that no harm or injury will be caused. A patient with asthma and diabetes who needs medicine that contains a steroid is an example mentioned in this book. Due to the client’s diabetes, using steroids runs the risk of making the patient’s diabetes unmanageable. Setting and upholding standards of competence and honesty, prioritizing the interests of patients over those of the doctor, and offering competent public guidance on health-related issues are all requirements of professionalism. Professionalism supports putting patient care ahead of the medical business.
The nature of the patient’s medical problem (acute, chronic, reversible, emergent, terminal), treatment goals, situations in which medical treatment is not indicated, chances of success of various treatment options, and ways the patient can benefit from nursing care and avoid harm are just a few of the aspects that are presented when approaching beneficence and non-maleficence in a clinical setting (Jonsen et al., 2015, p. 13). It is crucial to ask these questions in order to help medical professionals choose the best course of action for patient care and treatment. This book presents four instances that discuss patient preferences, quality of care, medical indications, therapy, and diagnosis.
When addressing the treatment’s aims, one must consider the patient’s circumstances, the nature of the condition, the intervention, and the best strategy to achieve the goals as they relate specifically to the patient. The physical/mental status of the patient and possible treatment options are assessed during medical interventions. Interventions might not be necessary, lack a scientific foundation, and occasionally are administered based solely on the wishes of the patient. Dying is defined as when a patient’s body processes are rapidly shutting down, and a patient can potentially die. This is the case when dealing with dying patients, and treatments are not the same as indicated.
In this section, the term “death” is used to describe clinical symptoms that unmistakably show the patient’s organ systems are swiftly and irreversibly degrading. In some cases, the patient may die within a few hours. Therefore, in the circumstances when the patient is said to be actively or imminently dying, the need for medical intervention is clearly indicated. In order to qualify for Medicare and Medicaid hospice care funding, a patient must have a prognosis of six months or fewer to live. This definition is given from administrative perspective rather than clinical. The term “terminal” should only be used in clinical medicine when referring to patients whom clinicians anticipate passing away from a fatal, progressive disease, despite receiving treatment in a relatively short amount of time. The diagnosis of a terminal illness should be supported by scientific data and clinical judgment that the condition is developing, untreatable, and fatal.
When addressing the case study of Mr. Care, some background information about his health issue roots, as well as health difficulties, medication and treatment regimens, hospitalization, and his current state have been provided. Mr. Care’s terminal illness is considered futile because he does not react to the therapy. Therefore, it is advised that all therapy be halted since the physiological system is not responding, and the condition cannot be reversed at this stage of care.
Clinical judgment is never utterly certain due to the nature of medical research and the unique characteristics of every patient. It is the process a clinician uses to make wise judgments when consistently facing ambiguity. The issue is whether delaying or discontinuing a therapy that leads to a futility problem is justified by the high likelihood of failure. Some ethicists contend that doctors have the right of refusing to offer therapies they think are unlikely to have a positive outcome. Others contend that futility must be defined in light of the irrational beliefs, ideals, and objectives of patients and their surrogates. It is crucial that the patient or surrogate get the end-of-life care they desire. Many individuals believe that patients should always be given the option to refuse DNR or CPR, as well as to give consent for both.
References
6/746 Jonsen, A., M. Siegler, W. Winslade. 2015. Clinical Ethics. A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine. 8th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, pp. 1-48.