Health Care Ethics: Jerry’s Medical Training Case Study

Medical office assistants are relied upon in the health care industry to bring some order in complex health care facilities. Their main goal is to support the roles of physicians and other health care providers. Jerry’s training qualifies him to issue the refill order with regard to the patient in the scenario. Medical office assistants are required to perform the following tasks:

• Coordination of patient visits
• Update physicians and patients with regard to change of dates of visits
• Administering medications
• Assessing patients’ vital signs
• Keeping patients’ records
• Filling out insurance forms
• Arranging for hospital admission
• Explaining medical procedures to patients
• Advising patients with regard to medications and special diets
• Authorizing drug refills as directed by their seniors

However, the roles of medical office assistants may be based on the laws in different locations (Fremgen, 2009). Therefore, it could be expected that some jurisdictions could allow medical office assistants to perform more duties than those working in different jurisdictions. It is clear from the above illustration of roles that Jerry is adequately trained to order for drug refills, but he is required to be instructed by his senior (Dr. William). Without such instructions, Jerry cannot order drug refills. Instructions are required because some medications could result in patient harm.

A difference

Assuming that the medications are needed by the patient on a daily basis, it would be ethical for Jerry to order drug refills without obtaining instructions from his senior because the drug is essential in the patient’s life. Refusal to order drug refills would negatively impact the health status of the patient. Deterioration of blood pressure would easily result in death. Therefore, it would be ethical for Jerry to order drug refills (Garrett, Baillie & Garrett, 2009). Such actions are needed in the health care industry to save patients’ lives. The patient has been on blood pressure medications. Therefore, the patient knows the names of blood pressure drugs that have provided the best efficacy. It would be ethical for Jerry to confirm the drugs from medical records in the facility and order for drug refills.

The doctrine of respondeat superior

The doctrine aims at protecting employees from possible lawsuits on the grounds of their actions that cause harm or damages (Fremgen, 2009). The doctrine is practiced on the grounds of vicarious liability. It proposes that employers should be prosecuted for the actions of their employees committed while on duty. It would require the establishment of the type of relationship between Jerry and Dr. William so that protection from prosecution could be granted (Fremgen, 2009). If it would be established that Jerry and Dr. William are an employee and employers respectively, then the issue would be applied to physical torts. However, the following questions would be answered to determine whether or not Jerry would be protected from a lawsuit (Fremgen, 2009):

1. Was the act of order drug refilling within the time and space limits of the health care facility?
2. Was the order drug refilling accidental?
3. Was Jerry authorised to perform such an action?
4. Was Jerry motivated to any extent to benefit from the act?

Advice to Jerry

Jerry would be advised to always ensure that he:

1. Consults his senior before he performs activities that would result in patient harm.
2. Assesses the benefits and possible harm of medications.
3. Assesses the legal and ethical issues that are associated with some actions within the health care industry.

Legal and ethical issues

Although Jerry would be committed to carrying out his duties, he would be affected by legal and ethical issues (Garrett et al., 2009). The following ethical issues would affect Jerry:

• Self-determination- respecting patients with regard to their acts and decisions.
• Non-maleficence- aiming at providing health care that does not harm patients.
• Fidelity- adherence to one’s commitment.
• Beneficence- focusing on providing good care to patients.

If Jerry fails to offer reasonable care, then he would be affected by legal issues (Fremgen, 2009). Some of these are malpractice and negligence. Malpractice implies that an individual does not act in the context of professional standards. Negligence could imply that an individual does not perform his or her duties as required. This could result in negative impacts within health care facilities.

Problem-solving methods in making an ethical decision

Two problem-solving methods would help Jerry make an ethical decision. First, the Utilitarian Approach would be used to analyze the problem and benefits of ethical options (Garrett et al., 2009). An ethical solution would be chosen based on the level of benefits. Second, the Common-Good Approach would be applied by Jerry to make an ethical decision that is beneficial to all patients who visit the health care facility (Garrett et al., 2009). The method would require him to recognize the goals of patients and the goals of the health care organization. Therefore, he would make an ethical decision that aims at achieving the goals.

References

Fremgen, B. F. (2009). Medical law and ethics (3^rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Garrett, T. M., Baillie, H. W., & Garrett, R. M. (2009). Health care ethics: Principles and problems (5^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.