Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative

Applying the Four Principles: Case Study

Part 1: Chart (60 points)

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

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence	Patient Preferences Autonomy
The principle of beneficence and non-maleficence is among the major five ethical principles outlined by APA. The beneficence principle states that psychologists should only engage in activities, which are beneficial to others (Young, 2017). On the other hand, the principle of non-maleficence states that practitioners should ensure that no one is hurt during their practices (Singh & Ivory, 2015). They should expose clients to the minimum harm to obtain the best outcomes. In the case study, the incidents of beneficence and non-maleficence are as described below. ·         The physician suggested immediate dialysis for James during the first visit due to his elevated blood pressure and fluid buildup, ·         Placing James on regular dialysis during the second visit to stabilize his deteriorating condition, ·         Proposing a kidney transplant to be performed within the next one year despite James being in a stable state currently, ·         Informing Mike and Joanne that the church members were not potential donors due to mismatch of their tissues, and ·         Suggesting for Mike and Joanne of a donor that was an ideal tissue match, James’ brother Samuel.	Autonomy is another major ethical principle, which psychologists and healthcare providers are required to adhere to. This ethical principle states that everyone is entitled to the right to independence, self-determination, and freedom to make their own choices without being influenced (Motloba, 2018). In the healthcare sector, the principle of autonomy states that clients have a right to make decisions about their own health without being influenced by care providers. Therefore, healthcare providers should respect autonomy even if they are not in agreement with the decision made by the client. The case study portrays various incidents of autonomy as illustrated below. Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative   v  The physician did not interrupt when Mike and Joane were making decisions regarding James’ medication, v  The physician did not interrupt when Mike and Joane were making a decision to forego the dialysis and place their faith in God, and v  The physician did not interrupt when Mike and Joane were making a decision whether to let Samuel donate a kidney to James or perhaps wait for God to do a miracle this time around.
Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy	Contextual Features Justice and Fairness
v  The physician did not consider Mike or Joanne as ideal kidney donors to James since they were not compatible donors, v  The physician did not consider any of the church members as an ideal donor since their tissues did not match with those of James, v  The physician advised Mike and Joanne to ensure a kidney transplant was done in the next year despite James’ current stable state, v  The physician proposed Samuel as an ideal kidney donor, and Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative v  The physician allowed Mike and Joanne to make a decision about Samuel donating one of his kidneys to his brother, James.	This APA general principle holds that individuals are entitled to the advancements, which have been made within a particular field of practice such as psychology or healthcare (APA, 2020). Justice and fairness are portrayed in the case study in one major incident. v  The physician allowed James to use the dialysis machine. This machine was used to perform daily rounds of dialysis to stabilize his condition.

 

 

Part 2: Evaluation

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

1. 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)

In the context of the Christian worldview, the principle of autonomy would be considered as the most pressing in this case. Autonomy states that everyone is entitled to the right to independence, self-determination, and freedom to make their own choices without being influenced (Singh & Ivory, 2015). In the healthcare sector, the principle of autonomy states that clients have a right to make decisions about their own health without being influenced. Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative. Therefore, healthcare providers should respect autonomy even if they are not agreed with the decision made by the client regarding treatment procedures. In this case, parents (Mike and Joane) are entitled to the independence of thought, and action when making any decision regarding the health care procedures of the patient since he is a minor. Thus, the physician respects their decision even if he was not in an agreement with it. The physician does not interrupt their decision to taking James home and wait for a miracle even if he was proposing for immediate dialysis due to his deteriorating condition. Additionally, he does not influence their decision when they decided to believe in God rather than making their son, Samuel loses his kidney. These two decisions were wrong and they were putting James’ life in danger. He could end up losing his life while they were waiting for God’s best time to perform a miracle for them Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative. Therefore, the Christian worldview considers autonomy as the most pressing principle among the four principles evidence in the case study.

 

2. 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)

A Christian would rank the principles in order. The principle of Non-maleficence, which advocates for less harmful procedures would be ranked as the first one (Ediger, 2015). This principle ensures that healthcare practitioners expose clients to minimize harm to get the best results. The second principle is justice or fairness. This principle holds that individuals are entitled to the advancements, which have been made within a particular field of practice such as psychology or healthcare. Therefore, this principle will give Christians an opportunity to benefit from technological advancements while receiving treatment. The third is the principle of beneficence, which advocates for good intentions towards the patients (Al-Bar & Chamsi-Pasha, 2015). Therefore, Christians should consider a decision that accrues the most benefits to them. Thus, the principle is against the Christians who fail to seek medication on time due to their faith. This behavior makes their health condition deteriorate like in the case of James. The principle of autonomy would be ranked as the last one. This ethical principle states that everyone is entitled to the right to independence, self-determination, and freedom to make their own choices without being influenced Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative. In this case, parents are entitled to the independence of intention, thought, and action when making any decision regarding health care procedures since the patient is a minor. The healthcare practitioner, therefore, is not supposed to use false during the decision-making process. This principle risks the health of most Christians who based their health decisions on faith rather than on facts.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

References:

Al-Bar, M. A., & Chamsi-Pasha, H. (2015). Beneficence. In Contemporary Bioethics (pp. 129-139). Springer, Cham.

APA. (2020). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct: Including 2010 and 2016 Amendments. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/

Ediger, M. J. (2015). Teaching Clinical Ethics Using the Four Topic Method. International Journal of Athletic Therapy and Training, 20(6), 10-13. Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative

Motloba, P. D. (2018). Understanding the principle of Autonomy (Part 1). South African Dental Journal, 73(6), 418-420.

Singh, J, P & Ivory, M. (2015). Beneficence/Nonmaleficence. The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology. 1-3.

Young, G. (2017). The Five Core and the Five Supplementary Ethical Principles and Their Sub-principles. In Revising the APA Ethics Code (pp. 63-91). Springer, Cham.

 

Case Study: Healing and Autonomy

Mike and Joanne are the parents of James and Samuel, identical twins born 8 years ago. James is currently suffering from acute glomerulonephritis, kidney failure. James was originally brought into the hospital for complications associated with a strep throat infection. The spread of the A streptococcus infection led to the subsequent kidney failure. James’s condition was acute enough to warrant immediate treatment. Usually cases of acute glomerulonephritis caused by strep infection tend to improve on their own or with an antibiotic. However, James also had elevated blood pressure and enough fluid buildup that required temporary dialysis to relieve Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative.

The attending physician suggested immediate dialysis. After some time of discussion with Joanne, Mike informs the physician that they are going to forego the dialysis and place their faith in God. Mike and Joanne had been moved by a sermon their pastor had given a week ago, and also had witnessed a close friend regain mobility when she was prayed over at a healing service after a serious stroke. They thought it more prudent to take James immediately to a faith healing service instead of putting James through multiple rounds of dialysis Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative. Yet, Mike and Joanne agreed to return to the hospital after the faith healing services later in the week, and in hopes that James would be healed by then.

Two days later the family returned and was forced to place James on dialysis, as his condition had deteriorated. Mike felt perplexed and tormented by his decision to not treat James earlier. Had he not enough faith? Was God punishing him or James? To make matters worse, James’s kidneys had deteriorated such that his dialysis was now not a temporary matter and was in need of a kidney transplant. Crushed and desperate, Mike and Joanne immediately offered to donate one of their own kidneys to James, but they were not compatible donors. Over the next few weeks, amidst daily rounds of dialysis, some of their close friends and church members also offered to donate a kidney to James. However, none of them were tissue matches.

James’s nephrologist called to schedule a private appointment with Mike and Joanne. James was stable, given the regular dialysis, but would require a kidney transplant within the year. Given the desperate situation, the nephrologist informed Mike and Joanne of a donor that was an ideal tissue match, but as of yet had not been considered—James’s brother Samuel.

Mike vacillates and struggles to decide whether he should have his other son Samuel lose a kidney or perhaps wait for God to do a miracle this time around. Perhaps this is where the real testing of his faith will come in? Mike reasons, “This time around it is a matter of life and death. What could require greater faith than that?” Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative

 

This assignment will incorporate a common practical tool in helping clinicians begin to ethically analyze a case. Organizing the data in this way will help you apply the four principles of principlism.
Based on the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and other required topic study materials, you will complete the “Applying the Four Principles: Case Study” document that includes the following:
Part 1: Chart
This chart will formalize principlism and the four-boxes approach by organizing the data from the case study according to the relevant principles of biomedical ethics: autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice.
Part 2: Evaluation
This part includes questions, to be answered in a total of 500 words, that describe how principalism would be applied according to the Christian worldview.
Remember to support your responses with the topic study materials.
APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
Applying the Four Principles: Case Study
Part 1: Chart (60 points)
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

Quality of Life
Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy Contextual Features
Justice and Fairness

Part 2: Evaluation
Answer each of the following questions about how principlism would be applied:
1. 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)

2. 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) Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative
References: