PHI 413 Applying the Four Principles Case Study

GCU PHI 413 Applying the Four Principles Case Study

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
The information provided by medical indicators is reliable, which aids in the correct diagnosis of patient health problems and the selection of the most effective therapy. Thus, beneficence emphasizes doing what’s best for others, whereas nonmaleficence is a symbol of the requirement to avoid doing anything that can cause damage (Bester, 2020). Mike and Joanne were doing what was best for James in this case study by doing what they could to help him get better from his glomerulonephritis. Although they knew that delaying James’s treatment could worsen his health, their behavior did not show any malice or desire to hurt him. They were Christians who believed that their child might be healed from his stroke after hearing about another patient’s miraculous recovery. And then, after being dissatisfied, they did come back for medical help.	When it comes to achieving the clinical outcomes that are important to the patient, their choices are the defining factor. The ability to make a choice based on one’s own knowledge and values without external influence is important to autonomy (Molina-Mula & Gallo-Estrada, 2020). James, being a minor, lacks the capacity to make decisions regarding his treatment. James’s guardians, however, are entitled to the ability to make choices that are in his best interest. When doing so, it would have been helpful to involve James and hear his perspective on his guardians’ choice to reject drugs in favor of miracles.
Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy	Contextual Features Justice and Fairness
To improve a patient’s quality of life, medical professionals must employ strategies supported by scientific evidence to restore him to his pre-illness level of health or improve upon it. Dialysis at the facility helped James a lot. Since James needs a kidney transplant, we must make yet another important choice. On this occasion, however, the only two compatible donors are brothers James and Samuel, so they’ll need to discuss the prospect of Samuel donating a kidney to James. Even more importantly, the parents need to take care of James in a way that is in his best interest and in accordance with the advice of his doctor.	To enhance the patient’s health, legal, social, and family decisions must be made within a context. Fairness and justice are crucial in bioethics because they examine fundamental principles like equality and fair treatment (Dige, 2019). James’s parents and doctors must shoulder the burden of decision-making about his care because he is just eight years old. His parents have a say in his care by choosing to rely on faith healing rather than conventional medicine. James needed a kidney transplant, and despite their initial disappointment, they returned to the point of offering to give him a kidney. When his brother Samuel is the only suitable candidate, though, they express hesitation. When there is a conflict of interest like this, fairness and justice are derailed.

Part 2: Evaluation

Answer each of the following questions about how the four principles and four boxes approach would be applied:

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)

In the case analysis, beneficence stands out as the most important principle. Every choice the family made was taken with the best interests of James’ recovery in mind. They are Christians, so they believe that if anyone can be cured, then their child can, too. Because they have been praying for solutions and healing for James, it would be unfair to hold them responsible for his predicament. Having their child live a typical life was a priority for them, and they knew prayer might help. The practice of beneficence involves taking appropriate and effective action to improve the lives of the persons in your charge. Therefore, the parents intended to act responsibly. The parents took their child to the emergency room before turning to prayer. Given that the pastor had previously cured someone of a stroke, the parents had good reason to believe that God could help their son. Because they cared about James so much, they promised the doctor they would return if prayer did not help and James’ health worsened. They demonstrated their noble intentions through their actions, as they might have avoided medical attention for James and decided to keep him at home if they had other intentions.

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)

According to Christian belief, the four guiding principles are best ranked as follows: beneficence, nonmaleficence, fairness and justice and individual autonomy. As per Christian teaching, the greatest commandment is love. As a result, there is no longer any cause for damage because love has wiped out all other motives. It is the primary responsibility of a parent, doctor, or guardian to safeguard the safety of the children in their care, and this duty comes second only to the duty of doing no harm (Juujärvi et al., 2019). In light of this, it is imperative that no effort be expended that could endanger their safety or health. As long as people are linked in love, these two aspects work together to foster stability, harmony, and togetherness in the community. Doing so implies that Christians are acting justly and fairly. The primary goal is to foster a more equitable society. These values should serve as the model for all activities. The reason autonomy is last on the list is that the first three factors establish an environment conducive to exchanging ideas and soliciting feedback. By discussing the next steps with the patient, care providers can show they respect and value the patient’s input before moving forward. It would be challenging to reorganize all these ideas to suit one’s own purposes because they are so well-known in the Christian context.

References

Bester, J. C. (2020). Beneficence, interests, and wellbeing in medicine: what it means to provide benefit to patients. The American Journal of Bioethics, 20(3), 53-62.

Dige, M. (2019). Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for Principlism. Etikk i praksis-Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, (1), 5-20.

Juujärvi, S., Ronkainen, K., & Silvennoinen, P. (2019). The ethics of care and justice in primary nursing of older patients. Clinical Ethics, 14(4), 187-194.

Molina-Mula, J., & Gallo-Estrada, J. (2020). Impact of nurse-patient relationship on quality of care and patient autonomy in decision-making. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(3), 835.

WEEK 3 NRS PHI 413 Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative

Assessment Traits

Requires Lopeswrite

Assessment Description

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.

Remember to support your responses with the topic Resources.

APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Attachments

PHI-413V-RS-T3T5CaseStudyHealingAndAutonomy.docx PHI-413V-RS-T3ApplyingFourPrinciplesCaseStudy.docx

RESSOURCES

Practicing Dignity: An Introduction to Christian Values and Decision-Making in Health Care

Read Chapters 3 from Practicing Dignity.

View Resource

Incorporating Spirituality into Patient Care

Read “Incorporating Spirituality into Patient Care,” by Orr, from American Medical Association Journal of Ethics (2015).

New Testament Overview

View the online video, “New Testament Overview,” from the Bible Project, located on the YouTube website (2018

Read Scripture: TaNaK/Old Testament

View the online video, “Read Scripture: TaNaK/Old Testament,” from the Bible Project, located on the YouTube website (2

Sacrifice and Atonement

Explore “Sacrifice and Atonement” webpage and watch the video, on the Bible Project website (2018).

https://thebibleproject.com/explore/sacrifice-atonement/

The Messiah

Explore “The Messiah” webpage and watch the video on the Bible Project website (2018).

https://thebibleproject.com/explore/the-messiah/

Understanding Health and Healing

View the “Understanding Health and Healing” media piece.

https://www.gcumedia.com/tncc/whole-person-care/understanding/

Word Study: Khata/Sin

View the online video, “Word Study: Khata/Sin,” from the Bible Project, located on the YouTube website (2018).

Word Study: Shalom/Peace

View the online video, “Word Study: Shalom/Peace,” from the Bible Project, located on the YouTube website (2017).

Optional – Topic 3: Optional Resources

For additional information, see the “Topic 3: Optional Resources” that are recommended.

PHI-413V-RS-T3OptionalResources.docx

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?”