Applying the Four Principles: Case Study Essay Sample
Instructions:
Check before you submit. Get Turnitin Score Report in 15 Minutes.
Don't risk the 'Red' score. Get the exact same Turnitin report your professor uses. Join 50,000+ students who submitted their essays with confidence this semester.
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. Format pages included….. Content:
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
Beneficence holds that every action should be for the good of the patient. Nonmaleficence principle protects the patient from interventions with adverse effects. It obligates health workers to first do no harm in the process of providing care to the patient. The principle ensures the provision of safe therapeutic interventions that improve the quality of life of the patient without any harm. Therefore, the healthcare providers must avoid any harm to the patient. From the case study, quick dialysis was required that even the doctor who was in duty recognized quickly. Also, the guardians held their faith by ensuring that James was taken to the healing service to ensure that they got the cure of his condition. Having seen this before, his parents had observed the healing service which ensured that some people had been recuperated by ensuring that they had enough faith and trust on God. After figuring out they had enough faith in God, they became confident that their child could also get similar healing and get a cure for his condition rather than going for dialysis treatment in the hospital. In this situation, there was a difference that existed between the parties which included the parents of James and the doctor on what was of great benefit to James to ensure that he was healed completely from his ailing condition. In this way, everyone viewed this as this choice as being right but it became a tough decision to review which condition was right. Possibilities were that the two conditions were correct but in the long run going by the advice of the doctor or going for a healing service, finally, it was considered that James needed the dialysis at that moment.
Autonomy refers to the right of the patient to make decisions regarding his/her care. It entails allowing the patient freedom to self-determination. Health providers are expected to obtain consent from their clients before the administration of any intervention (Black & Chitty, 2016). They should provide the necessary education to the patient so as to make an informed decision. The principle of autonomy protects the patients’ dignity and promotes knowledge on the condition affecting the patient. As a result, it leads to adherence to the therapeutic plan. The parents of James from this case study found that James had been experiencing the problems of kidney malfunctioning which was ancillary to the glomerulonephritis. His parents knew that it was an extreme condition which required some considerations. Besides, observing the reactions of the doctor asking for much faster dialysis, Joanne and Mike found that their child was to skip the dialysis and then take their child to the faith healing service administration. In the next following days, the guardians to James then decided they would return to the hospital emergency clinic when the condition of their child had disintegrated. Considering this situation, with placing the life of James in jeopardy, the autonomy of the parents were respected in this case is considered the most important principle though it may not be the best option which could suit the ailing condition of their child.
Quality of Life
Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy
Contextual Features
Justice and Fairness
The health providers had an obligation to provide care …
