Case Study On Biomedical Ethics In The Christian Narrative Paper

Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative

Medical indications (Beneficence and Nonmaleficence)

Medical indications include caring, diagnosing, and providing effective interventions for patients (Pipien, 2018). They are the facts and interpretations about the patient’s condition. Regarding the Healing and Autonomy case study, James suffers from an acute glomerulonephritis, thus needs immediate treatment. As such, he requires a regular dialysis and a kidney transplant within a year to sustain his condition. Before James’ kidney damaged, the attending physician suggested immediate dialysis, however, Mike and Joan opted for a spiritual healing where John was prayed for over a healing service. Unfortunately, James didn’t heal and the couples decided to return to the hospital. In turn, the nephrologist informed them that James’ condition deteriorated due to treatment delays Case Study On Biomedical Ethics In The Christian Narrative Paper.

ORDER HERE NOW

Within this context, James’ parents acted at the best interest of their son and opted for spiritual healing. This was after they attended` a healing service where a close friend regained mobility after suffering from a serious stroke. Mike and Joan did not intend to harm James; as Christians, they put their faith in God despite knowing that James condition could worsen if the physician failed to conduct the dialysis immediately. Even though Mike and Joan’s decision affected immediate treatment and indirectly worsened James condition, healthcare practitioners have an obligation to exercise beneficence and non-maleficence at all cost. As such, they should continue providing care to better James life and involve his parents in decision making regardless of the situation.

Patient Preferences (Autonomy)

The autonomy principle underpins that all adults of sound mind have the power to make rational decisions and a right to determine what shall be done with their bodies (Westin, 2018); however, when a patient is a minor or mentally unstable, the parent or immediate family will assume his role and make decision based on his best interest.

Within this context, James is a minor (8 years old) and lacks the capacity to make informed decision. As such, his parents have assumed the decision making role on his behalf.

Here, the nephrologist informed Mike and Joan about their son’s condition after diagnosing him. In turn, the parents assumed James autonomy role and took him to church for a healing service instead of placing him on dialysis. Although Mike and Joan’s choice contradicted the physician’s suggestions, he respected their service healing pursuit. Upon returning, the nephrologist welcomed them and continued to diagnose James. He informed them that James needs a kidney transplant and screened several church members to determine a kidney that matches James’ as per Mike and Joan’s wish.  Unfortunately, only Samuel’s kidney matched James’. Upon delivering the news to Mike and Joan, the doctor adhered to the autonomy principle by allowing them to make the transplant decisions involving their sons.

Quality of Life (Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy)

Quality of life is an important consideration in medical care. It incorporates the three ethical principles to promote a patients’ physical, psychological, and social well-being. Even though James quality of life deteriorated, the physician exercised autonomy and allowed Mike and Joan to seek spiritual intervention as the first treatment option. He also informed them about Samuel’s kidney being a match and allowed them to make informed transplant decision.

Importantly, Mike and Joan and the healthcare practitioners have a responsibility to practice beneficence and non-maleficence to provide quality care and save James’ life. They should make good decisions that does not harm nor compromise the patient’s quality of life. Besides, James parents seek informed consent from their sons before allowing the doctor to conduct the transplant to avoid hurting them and ensure they are satisfied with it despite being minors.

Contextual Features (Justice and Fairness)

Justice and fairness implies that patients have a right to fair and impartial treatment. Even though James condition worsened, the physician and James parents should act at the patient’s best interest to uphold justice and fairness. Also, the nephrologist can only use Samuel’s kidney if Joan and Mike consent and give him the go ahead. Importantly, Mike and Joan must inform Samuel about the transplant issue and consider the long-term impact of their actions to ensure justice and fairness prevail.

In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how would each of the principles be specified and weighted in this case? Explain why. (45 points)

Christian world view argues that we were created in the image and likeness of God, and we should thus seek spiritual health through prayers and care for our bodies (Hoehner, 2020). Within the healing and autonomy case study, the principles would be specified and weighted based on the need to care and protect human body through making right decisions and not indulging in harmful activities.

Here, Christians would accord autonomy more weight, followed by beneficence, non-maleficence and lastly justice and fairness. Autonomy is prioritized because God created man in his own image and likeness and granted him the free will to make decision according to his teachings. The decision should acknowledge his teachings and strengthen our paths, hence, ascertaining beneficence as the second principle (Ephesians 3:5). Beneficence abides by God’s teaching where human beings are required to do good at all costs. The third principle non-maleficence falls under the doing good teaching and dictates a caregiver’s moral obligation to relieve suffering and ensure the patient doesn’t incur any harm (De Roubaix, 2019). It abides with Ephesians teaching where Christians are mandated to practice kindness, tenderness, and desist from bitterness and harmful acts (3:6). Lastly, the justice and fairness principle is rooted in Christian world view and argues that everyone’s desires and needs are important. It means considering the three principles by treating and caring for patients with at most compassion, dignity, and love.

In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian balance each of the four principles in this case? Explain why. (45 points)

Christian ethics is not just a legalistic or licentious set of rules but a way of life in Christ. According to Christian world view, caring for physical life and body is a significant consent. Christians are called to care for the physical world by relieving the body from suffering, helping it flourish, and fulfilling its purpose (Hoehner, 2020). Considering the above teachings, Christians would balance the four principles according to Christianity values and beliefs. Here, Christians would prioritize beneficence as the first option, non-maleficence as the second option, autonomy as the third, and justice as the last principle. Beneficence refers to the act of mercy, charity, and kindness (De Roubaix, 2019). It is among the fruits of the holy spirit and inspires us to do what is right. Here, James parents had their son’s best interest at heart when they opted for spiritual healing and seek further medical interventions when the spiritual intervention failed Case Study On Biomedical Ethics In The Christian Narrative Paper.

The second principle, non-maleficence would ensure that James get protected from any harm and relieved from suffering by consenting to the transplant decision. Importantly, the autonomy principle will prompt James’ parents to make informed transplant decision while considering James’ and Samuel’s views. Lastly, justice and fairness would improve James’ quality of life. Mike and Joan would consider it last to ensure all the three principles (autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence) are incorporated within the treatment intervention to improve the patient’s quality of life.

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 and four boxes approach.

Based on the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and other required topic Resources, you will complete the “Applying the Four Principles: Case Study” document that includes the following:

Part 1: Chart

This chart will formalize the four principles and four boxes approach 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.

Include this reference
Hoehner, P. (2020). Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative. Practicing dignity: An introduction to Christian values and decision making in health care.

References

De Roubaix J. A. (2011). Beneficence, non-maleficence, distributive justice and respect for patient autonomy–reconcilable ends in aesthetic surgery? Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery: JPRAS, 64(1), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2010.03.034

Hoehner, P. (2020). Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative. Practicing dignity: An introduction to Christian values and decision making in health care.

Pipien I. (2018). Beneficence and nonmaleficence in care. Nursing Ethics, 63(824), 51–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soin.2018.02.012

The Holy Bible: New King James Version. (1982). Ephesians 3.5-6

Westin A. (2018). ‘Despite Circumstance’: The Principles of Medical Ethics and the Role of Hope. The New bioethics: a multidisciplinary journal of biotechnology and the body, 24(3), 258–267.

ORDER HERE A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER HERE

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.

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?”

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 the four principles and four boxes approach would be applied:

1. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how would each of the principles be specified and weighted in this case? Explain why. (45 points)

 

2. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian balance each of the four principles in this case? Explain why. (45 points)Case Study On Biomedical Ethics In The Christian Narrative Paper