A woman enters the emergency room with stomach pain. She undergoes a CT scan ...
Question:A woman enters the emergency room with stomach pain. She undergoes a CT scan and is diagnosed with an abdominal aortic aneurysm, a weakening in the wall of the aorta which causes it to stretch and bulge.The physicians inform her that the only way to fix the problem is surgically and that the chances of survival are about 50/50. They also inform her that time is of the essence, and that should the aneurysm burst, she would be dead in a few short minutes.The woman is a dancer; she worries that the surgery will leave a scar that will negatively affect her work. Therefore, she refuses any surgical treatment. Even after much pressure from the physicians, she adamantly refuses surgery.Feeling that the woman is not in her correct state of mind and knowing that time is of the essence, the surgeons decide to perform the procedure without consent. They anesthetize her and surgically repair the aneurysm. She survives and sues the hospital for millions of dollars.a. Do you believe that the physicians' actions were justified, not justified, or both in any way?b. Is it ever right to take away someone's autonomy? (Would a court order make the physicians' decisions ethical?)Medical Ethics:Medical ethics are moral principles put into place by the medical community as well as the scientific community. These ethics help establish the best possible treatment for patients.
Answer and Explanation:a) No, the physicians' actions were not justified. Even though the patient's justification for refusing a life-saving procedure is not the best, this is still her decision. In this case, the physicians should have had the patient sign an against medical advice form and heavily educated the patient on why this could, and more than likely will, result in death. If the patient still refused, there is nothing at that point the physicians can do. This is why against medical advice forms exist; patients refuse life-saving treatments all the time. These forms protect the provider. In this case, the patient was not wrong to pursue legal action because this was against her wishes and stripped her of her autonomy.b) There are some situations where it is justifiable to take away someone's autonomy; however, this is not one of those cases. Most prominently, it's justifiable when a patient's refusal of medical treatment puts others at risk, such as a pregnant woman refusing treatment. At that time, a court order might be obtained. At the end of the day, it is very difficult to overrule a patient's autonomy.Medical Disclaimer: The information on this site is for educational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice.Legal Disclaimer: The information on this site is for educational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional legal advice.
https://oneclass.com/study-guides/ca/u-of-waterloo/biol/biol-331/919808-biol331-midterm.en.html
页:
[1]