24/7 writing help on your phone
Save to my list
Remove from my list
Owing to scientific and technical advances, the structure of the health care industry is constantly changing. Issues in the delivery of health care services are of considerable concern to healthcare establishments, both legal and ethical. Healthcare practitioners work for their patients’ well-being and health while upholding legal and ethical principles. Health dilemmas are inevitable. Living wills and instructions in healthcare are commonly blurred. Living wills are the patient’s wishes expressed in the judgment of the patient if they could determine what to do in an emergency.
In this post, I will address a case involving errors in living will health care and how I can amend legislation so as to promote our constitutional principles and policy objectives.
The case involving a 79-year-old woman, a retired nurse, was relocated from an outpatient hospital for the treatment of esophageal perforation to a tertiary care trauma center. At the outer clinic, the patient underwent resection of the esophageal diverticulum and then endured perforation that was complicated by continuous leakage.
Patients were confirmed to be in reasonably good health before their initial elective surgery. She was working and caring for her parents, as she was in the early stages of dementia. On arrival at the new hospital, an esophageal stent was placed to treat perforation. The patient suffered septic shock during this operation, which resulted in many organ failures. No new surgical interventions to help enhance patient status have been deemed necessary.
She had a living will to withhold or withdraw treatment, which only delays her death, whether she was incurable or fragile in her mental or physical state without a realist expectation of regeneration.
She indicated that she did not like cardiac reconstruction, electrical ventilation, or artificial feeding (Advanced directives,n.d.). Advanced Directives or a Living Will are the wishes of the patient expressed in the decision made by the patient because they were able to determine what to do in the event of an emergency (Care managers,n.d.) . In the case of the woman, an intention was written and indicated that she did not wish to be alive, although, her husband felt that it would not be enforced in the scenario that she would be used it if the advanced directive or live will is questioned. With the issues involved with the relationship and their children, there is a range of legal considerations that could include the ethics committee.
During this situation, members of the team do not agree, but instead, seek to settle their differences. Consensus on a medically approved and politely called for treatment package is achieved. A traditional policy-making agenda, where ethical values of equality, compassion, and non-malice are functional. Although no medical-judicial inquiries are currently being conducted, there is no legal duty but to follow suit.
An adult who can make choices will have to live up to the ethical principle of autonomy. Physicians are responsible for evaluating their capacity to make decisions. If skills are lacking, the healthcare practitioner may contact the legally appointed decision-maker to provide advice on the needs of the patient, or, if uncertain, what the patient may want. Autonomy represents the American social ideal of freedom and defines a free will that enables us to accept others’ choices and beliefs. In this case, patients’ honor is not the caregivers’ integrity. The legal norm instructs healthcare practitioners to consider medical preferences and desires for diagnosis. Informed consent doctors or nurses and their relatives should be aware of the conditions in the case of informed consent before treatment or the drug that may have triggered the condition of the patient who left them to be given. They will also be asked what could happen if it’s not as planned, and whether it goes as scheduled, what to expect. They include the predicted outcomes, any further therapies that need to be pursued, and the chance of medication or care.
The next constitutionally permitted decision-maker will do so where an individual can not give informed consent. The healthcare provider can decide on behalf of the patient on life or death in certain emergencies. In the case of the situation, the doctor advised the patient’s wife that she could not survive in a chronically unconscious state. However, the husband did not withdraw any life support from the informed arrangement except with the details received. In the case of this scenario, the consent of the patient’s wife may have been informed, allowing him to understand what consent the patient was. I may use the patient’s Virtue Approach to find out if this was the condition his wife desired. I may always make a second party coming to determine the case by explaining what was happening with input from the other individual and asking the participant whether they can agree.
Advanced directive or living will use the rights approach with the spouse to discuss the living will with the spouse. The path to justice states that people have the freedom to choose what to do with their lives freely. While the woman was alive, she specifically said that she did not want to be sold if she was all in a state of unconsciousness. In the course of treatment, the doctor advised the spouse and his children that she was in an involuntary state or a terminal illness that she could not survive. In the rights method, I could investigate with the partner that it was not his wife’s wish to stay sold using the documentation given.
Surrogate decision-making Awareness is when a surrogate decides, the husband will undoubtedly make decisions on behalf of his or her partner, but only if his or her wife is alive. In his case, he could not know what his wife believed she wanted, but what her husband thought she wanted. For the life-support nurse, he had to know that she was in an unconscious state of mind and that she wished to turn off the life-support in her wishes. I could have an approach to correct or justice where we would have to ask him if it was appropriate for him to make the decision which she would not have agreed in the case of an unspoken situation.
In several cases, professional and or legal problems can arise. A delicate line of action occurs in the event of conflicts between the patient and the families associated with the health care provider. We use a lot of ethics in healthcare particularly for family members who are involved in providing treatment that is not mutually accepted. Knowing in this situation that the loved one is dying is a painful pill to take and the decision-maker does not know how to let go and try to keep the patient alive if they can do so even without a viable life event. Ethically, it would be better to try to convince the husband to make the right choice for his partner, who might not be the best decision for him.
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.get help with your assignment