Introduction
When considering any problematic situation in life, one must first look at what the solutions are from a moral standpoint. Many scholars believe that the answer to any problem can be humane and that finding it is something that every person who encounters difficulties in their life should strive for. Sometimes there are moments in life the way out of which is impossible without a moral dilemma and sacrifice on one side or the other. However, it is worth understanding that such situations are rare, and humility in making a decision should be at the head of any of the methods of solving the problem. This aspect is essential to consider if a person’s life or health is at stake. It is hard to imagine the moral choices that are sometimes disregarded by both medical personnel and hospital administrators. One such example will be discussed in this paper.
Discussion
Considering the data, which are given in the condition of the problem, then, first of all, it is needed to pay attention to the poor financial situation of the hospital. This aspect is critical because funding is one of the most important aspects of the hospital’s living conditions, along with the expertise of the medical staff and innovative treatment methods. Each of these factors is interrelated and cannot exist without the aforementioned conditions being met (Moskop, 2017). Financing is the fundamental factor on which all the others depend because staff recruitment and equipment renewal can only be achieved through profitable financial investments.
Talking about the specific example of the problem, it has two particular solutions, which depend on how far-sighted the person is. On the one hand, it is possible to use the more immoral option, which can bring in more money and, as a result, improve patient care in the future. On the other hand, one can make a decision that is based on the moral here and now, thereby not breaking the law at the cost of less funding (Smith et al., 2017). Each person must decide for themselves which of the choices is more correct and which will be of more benefit.
Making one decision or another depends not only on the individual but also on the problem at hand and the situation in which one finds oneself. Often the choices to be made are more complex and confusing because decisions must be viewed from a deeper perspective (Smith et al., 2017). It is also essential to be guided by some steps, thanks to which it is possible to build an algorithm of actions and predict the result of the problem situation (Mcway, 2014). The first option is preferable, as it will help save more lives in the future. Even though it is more difficult to perform and not all people will be able to accept it, the result of actions will be noticeable shortly.
First of all, it is necessary to analyze the issue at hand because if careful planning is done, the result may seem more pronounced. After that, it is essential to pay attention to the small details that create the problem. Often one can see that external factors can be more severe than the issue being raised and have the answer in themselves (Moskop, 2017). The next step is to work as a team because this removes the subjectivity of the decision and allows the problem to be viewed from different angles and influenced by the opinions of others. It is essential to understand that this step requires the presence of people competent in the matter, who, based on the data obtained, will be able to formulate the correct conclusion. Subsequent steps will be directed only to the adoption of a rational way out of the situation based on the method of induction.
The medical field must, first of all, be guided by the morality of the decision. This is due in large part to the fact that it is a matter of people’s lives and what can help to protect them. It is worth understanding that any decision made within the walls of a medical institution immediately becomes public knowledge, which may also disagree with the results (Hammaker et al., 2017). This brings reputational risks and reduces the opportunity for a correct decision in the future.
The manager brings to the work their riches and demeanor. Individual needs, parentage, and religious beliefs – all these factors form the manager’s system of values. When making ethically correct decisions, a manager is guided primarily by specific personal characteristics, such as confidence in their forces and a developed sense of independence.
One of the most important personal characteristics of the manager is the stage of his moral development. At the location of the previous development, people are interested first of all in external victories (and punishment). The threat of negative consequences in the event of disobedience is the basis for the consolidation of power. In organizational terms, this stage is characterized by managers who use authoritarian or primitive leadership styles, as well as managers who focus on guarantees that specific tasks will be performed (Hébert & Rosen, 2020). The best way to achieve the goals is to work together in groups. The most appropriate leadership style is one that encourages interaction and cooperation.
At the stage of the next, or principle-based, development, people are guided primarily by intrinsic values and norms, in many cases ignoring the rules and laws that require violation of these norms. Intrinsic values become more important than even strictly external ones. At this superior level of development, managers use transformational or service leadership styles. Attention is concentrated on the needs of followers and stimulation of others to self-determined thinking and solution of problems that arise from the principles of morality (Hammaker et al., 2017). This level is characterized by the ownership of power when the employees obtain the right of constructive participation in the management of the organization.
In everyday practice, doctors often have conflicts between utilitarian ethics, which teach to take into account only the results of medical activity, and deontological ethics, which requires a focus not on the results but on universally recognized ethical principles: honesty, duty, the Hippocratic Oath, respect for human rights. An important moral problem is the relationship between the patient’s freedom and the doctor’s supervision. This care is referred to as “paternalism,” which can be genuine (if the patient is not sick) or solitary when the patient fully trusts the physician and is firmly convinced that he will do everything for his well-being. However, non-solitary paternalism is more common and requires excellent tact on the part of the physician to direct the patient’s will to the path of care.
Conclusion
Sensitivity is the key to cooperation between the doctor and the patient. It is necessary to be able to put yourself in the place of the patient and look at the world through his eyes. The doctor must patiently listen to the patient, even when he repeats himself, and allow him to discuss the causes and consequences of the disease and its future. Sympathy can be expressed quite simply by putting your hand on the patient’s shoulder, which creates a confident, positive, and emotional attitude that can be used for cooperation. However, this attitude toward the patient does not at all mean permissiveness (Hébert & Rosen, 2020).
References
Hammaker, D. K., Knadig, T. M., & Tomlinson, S. J. (2017). Health care ethics and the law. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Hébert P. , & Rosen, W. (2020). Doing right: A practical guide to ethics for medical trainees and physicians. Oxford University Press.
Mcway, D. C. (2014). Today’s health information management: An integrated approach. Delmar/Cengage Learning.
Moskop, J. (2017). Ethics and health care: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Smith, S. W., Coggon, J., Hobson, C., Huxtable, R., McGuinness, S., MiolaJ., & Neal, M. (2017). Ethical judgments: Re-writing medical law. Hart Publishing, An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.