Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative HW

Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative HW

Part 1: Chart

Medical Indications

Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

In order to make a diagnosis and determine treatment options, there is a need to assess medical indications exhibited by a patient. Beneficence refers to a health professional acting with best intentions to provide care to patients whereas non-beneficence encourages care providers not to do harm (Gillon, 2018). As per the case study, the surrogates of James acted in the best interest of the patient even the medical condition of James would still be worse even when treated.

Patient Preferences

Autonomy

Autonomy refers to the right of patients to express their choice or make a decision of care yet to be administered to them (Gillon, 2018). Even though James is an underage child, his right to autonomy must be upheld. The parents ought to have consulted the patient before making a decision on care.  The physician had limited influence to alter the decisions made by the parents.

   
Quality of Life

Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy

In the healthcare setting, quality of life entail the medical features of a patient after a therapy has been administered (Gillon, 2018). As per the case study, the health condition of James was worst but improved significantly after dialysis. Conversely, the patient needs a renal replacement therapy involving a kidney transplant to improve the quality of his life. His brother can donate to him his kidney but his father has an opinion to rely on faith regarding the health status of James. The parents, however, should consult James regarding the issue because the last time they relied on faith his condition worsened (Gillon, 2018). The parents should act in the best interest so that the brother can donate the kidney to optimize the quality of health for James.

Contextual Feature

Justice and Fairness

Medical decision can greatly be influenced by familial and social factors as well as legal considerations. In the case study, James’ parents relied on faith when making decision for the health status of their son (Gillon, 2018). They focused more on religious beliefs for healing rather than receiving kidney from his bother. However, the conflict of interest arose when there was a mismatch of cells between James and his brother meaning that the latter could not donate his kidney. This made the parents were therefore willing to donate the kidney and even appealed for the goodwill of well-wishers to offer this vital organ.

   

 

Part 2: Evaluation

Four Principles most Pressing according to Christian worldview

In the Christian perspectives, beneficence emerge as the principle with the most pressing issue pertaining to the health of a patient. The argument is guided by the premise that James’ parents made decision in the interest of their ailing son. They blindly believed that James would be healed with the support from their daily prayers (SSorajjakool et al., 2017). In this context, the parents relied more on prayers rather than providing kidney to support the life of James. Other than medical support, the parents had faith that prayers also work. No one can criticize their approach and perception in life considering that they made attempts to address the health of their son despite his deteriorating health (Hubbell, Kauschinger & Oermann, 2017). They were also against the idea about the brother donating one of his kidneys to the ailing James. All these actions affirm that the parents cared for the health status of their children. In fact, when the health status of James deteriorated while receiving homecare, they took him back to the care facility for further examination. With this, the parents aimed at addressing the health of their son despite wrong decisions that they sometimes made with regard to his care.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative HW

How a Christian might rank the Priority of the Four Principles

In an approach of health, a Christian can give priority to the four principles by starting with beneficence as it is based on one’s

Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative HW

Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative HW

goodwill regarding the health of others. According to Christian teachings, parents need to provide love to their children and this is consistent with the principle of beneficence (SSorajjakool et al., 2017). The second priority goes to nonmaleficence which points as doing no harm to patients. Christian parents should not intend or initiate activities that harm their children. The principle is based on the Christian teaching that human life is sacred and that it should be protected by everyone. Justice and fairness are ranked the third as they ensure that health service delivery is provided without preferential treatment to anyone. In Christian teaching, every human being is equal before God and this should be demonstrated during provision of care. The last ranking on the list will be autonomy which ensures that patients make decisions on medical services provided to them. Christians need to allow their patients to choose their option of care and this decision must be respected (Hubbell, Kauschinger & Oermann, 2017). The premise ensures that the dignity of every person is upheld so that one receives quality service to improve on their well-being.

References

Gillon, R. (2018). Principlism, virtuism, and the spirit of oneness. In Healthcare Ethics, Law and Professionalism (pp. 45-59). Routledge.

Hubbell, S. L., Kauschinger, E., & Oermann, M. (2017). Development and Implementation of an Educational Module to Increase Nurses’ Comfort With Spiritual Care in an Inpatient Setting. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing48(8), 358-364.

SSorajjakool, S., Carr, M. F., Nam, J. J., Sorajjakool, S., & Bursey, E. (2017). World religions for healthcare professionals. Routledge.

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. 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?”

Hoehner, J. (2020). Practicing dignity: An introduction to Christian values and decision making in health care. Retrieved from https://lc.gcumedia.com/phi413v/practicing-dignity-an-introduction-to-christian-values-and-decision-making-in-health-care/v1.1/#/chapter/3

Unread

Hello Alycia,

Spirituality in values influences decisions and things to accept or repel all by an individual or a group of people. These yardsticks used to judge the value of the social-economical niche you belong to also affects your value system as medical personnel some behavior. Others and others could be tolerated under extreme conditions irrespective of both there is a code that assures that the system’s fundamental purpose is Mets at all times (Rosemann et al., 2018).

Reference

Rosemann, A., & Luo, H. (2018). Attitudes Towards the Donation of Human Embryos for Stem

Cell Research Among Chinese IVF Patients and Students. Journal of bioethical inquiry, 15(3),

441–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-018-9862-9

 

Read

According to my worldview every human person value is equal and should be treated equally. That is in my perfect world. However, we do not live in a perfect world. People are born into poverty, with mental disabilities, etc, which they are not treated equally.

Regarding abortions, I personally do not agree with them, but I also understand that I am not in their position. I am not in favor of recent events with the government and the reverse of roe vs wade. It deeply saddens me when I see protesters in front of clinics against abortions.

Designer babies is something I never heard of. “A designer baby is a baby genetically engineered in vitro for specially selected traits, which can vary from lowered disease-risk to gender selection.” (Ly, 2011). I can understand how this would be beneficial to prevent disease. I feel it may be unethical to “design a baby” such as eye color or gender.

“Stem cells are cells that haven’t differentiated yet. They have the ability to divide and make an indefinite number of copies of themselves.” (Cafasso, 2017). This is an ethical issue because an embryo is destroyed. This can help people with diseases, I can understand where it would be beneficial and would consider if my disease process needed stem cells.

I try to sympathize and understand why people do choose to do bioethical issues that I may not agree on. What pattern I often see is people disagree with these issues until it personally effects them.

Cafasso, J. (2017). About Stem Cells. Healthline. https://www.healthline.com/health/stem-cell-research

Ly, S. (2011). Ethics of Designer Babies. ASU. https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/ethics-designer-babies

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.