NURS FPX4000 Assessment 3 Applying Ethical Principles
Context
Assessment 3: Applying Ethical Principles
Student Name
FPX 4000: Interdisciplinary Plan Proposal
Capella University
Prof Name
Month Date, Year
Applying Ethical Principles
Healthcare professionals must adhere to four ethical health principles while performing their duties. The foundation of medical practice is based on these principles. It is hoped that they would serve as a roadmap for personnel to follow when faced with difficult situations (Guidolin et al., 2021).
Overview of the Case Study
Dr. Angela Kerr is the new pediatrician of the smith’s daughter Ana, and she deals with the process of vaccination of their Child. Since Ana’s birth, her parents have bonded well and want to nurture her naturally. Autism rates are rising, which they say is a vaccination risk. Their new pediatrician, Dr. Angela Kerr, listens to the Smiths’ research, including online mommy blogs that outline how immunizations may have caused autism. The Smiths opt against vaccinating Ana despite medical advice. Dr. Kerr urges that Ana be completely vaccinated, despite vaccinations’ recent criticism. Dr. Kerr says immunizations have saved millions of children’s lives and reduced child mortality over the previous century. ).
This approach encourages the public and healthcare practitioners to report bad vaccination reactions, allowing the government to monitor their safety. No autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or developmental disorder vaccine has been proven safe. Many studies have demonstrated that thimerasol-containing vaccinations do not raise autism risk. Dr. Kerr cautions the Smiths that some children’s immune systems are impaired by hereditary illnesses or cancer treatment. Such children may not be vaccinable. Some children are too young for vaccines. Dr. Kerr concludes that most states mandate immunizations before children may enter school. State-specific situations allow parents to forgo vaccinations. Jenna and Chris Smith agree they understood Dr. Kerr’s explanation but do not want Ana vaccinated. Dr. Kerr is confused.
Case Study Analysis in the light of Ethical Principles
In Ana’s case study, the main factor leading to the ethical issue is the negation of her vaccination due to its effect on her body later on. When Dr. Kerr noticed their parents’ concerns and tried to convince them, the doctor felt that it was their duty to make parents aware of its usefulness. She also explains the risk and the conditions in which it occurs. During the conversation, the she makes an effort to provide an objective opinion by referencing research studies. Furthermore, herd immunity and VPI were being told to Ana’s parents. On the other side, Ana’s parents believe that the vaccination causes autism in their daughter. Dr. Kerr is worried about their health. Ana, in the future, without vaccination, might have health problems. Vaccination rates among 2-year-olds have doubled since 2001, reaching 1.3% of infants born in 2015. Despite the relatively tiny number, the transformation is evident (Hill et al., 2017).
Ethical Decision-Making Model
When confronted with an ethical issue, moral judgment entails choosing between the right and erroneous course of action. Ethical behavior results from moral awareness and moral judgment (Opsahl et al., 2020). A person’s ethical behavior is defined as taking the correct course of action when faced with a challenge. Dr. Kerr’s concerns about Ana’s vaccination reflect the doctor’s moral consciousness. When Dr. Kerr tried to persuade Ana’s parents to vaccinate her, it reflected his moral judgment as a pediatrics doctor. When confronted with a challenging situation, one must choose the right path of action to be ethical.
The fact that Dr. Kerr is aware of the circumstances surrounding Ana’s health shows that she has moral awareness. Dr. Kerr’s moral judgment is reflected in his decision to persuade Ana’s parents to seek medical attention for her. Dr. Kerr’s actions define an ethical response to a dilemma. Dr. Kerr should adhere to his professional experience. Dr. Kerr meticulously analyzes decisions as a healthcare practitioner to ensure that their patient receives the finest care and advice possible. Thus, qualitative data from peer-reviewed qualitative publications were used to evaluate ethical standards in everyday practice by healthcare professionals. Studies have demonstrated that health care providers consider the concepts of justice, beneficence, and autonomy while making judgments (Kemparaj & Kadalur, 2018).
Assessing Communication Effectiveness in a Case Study
Communication is more than simply transferring information, and it’s about deciphering the feelings and reactions behind the facts. A healthy doctor-patient relationship hinges on the doctor’s ability to convey information clearly and compassionately. Today’s health care system requires greater clinical productivity while providing less time for one-on-one interaction between the doctor and patient. It is possible to enhance the relationship between patients and doctors by doing patient-centered, communicating with compassion, and working together on decisions (Miller & Dimatteo, 2020). Dr. Kerr tried to understand the concerns of Ana’s parents by giving them relevant facts and data for it. When Dr. Kerr spends time with Ana’s parents, he discovers the reason for their reluctance toward vaccinations. Dr. Kerr can better comprehend the problem, thanks to active listening. (Latibjonovna, 2021). Their relationship with Ana’s parents is open, and they explain to them the implications of immunization on Ana’s health. They emphasize the significance of a child’s immunization being correctly diagnosed.
Consequently, Dr. Kerr effectively conveys the matter to Ana’s parents by respecting their emotions and presenting them with thorough information about the dilemma (Ward, 2018). Most of the research evaluated found a link between improved patient health outcomes and effective physician-patient communication. Smith and her husband remain skeptical about getting their daughter the medical attention she needs, but Dr. Kerr remains sympathetic. So that they might share his objective professional opinion, Dr. Kerr appears to have engaged in giving reference of authentic research. Probably Dr. Kerr anticipated Ana’s parents would reconsider their decision and explained that children’s health could be harmed, in the future, if she do not get immunity from the vaccine. In dealing with Ana’s case, Dr. Kerr took a systematic approach that appears to have been ineffectual, as her parents continued to hold fast to their belief that vaccinations were to blame for her autism.
Patients can benefit from this study by learning how to communicate more effectively by listening carefully and showing genuine and empathic concern for the well-being of their loved ones.
Applying Ethical Principles to the Ethical Dilemma
Autonomy is defined as “accepting and comprehending the values of patients.” There are three main elements of medical ethics at stake in this issue for Dr. Kerr’s ethical decision-making. Ethical dilemmas are produced by the conflict between the concepts of autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence. The doctor respects Ana’s parents’ fears and reservations by not coercing them to get the girl appropriately assessed. The doctor adds to his argument to convince them of the significance of having a vaccination dosage. In order to safeguard the health of their patients, pediatricians refuse to see families with children who have not had a vaccination.
An estimated one-third of physicians and one-half of pediatric offices say they will not handle families that refuse to vaccinate their children. According to the doctors, their policy is to safeguard the families of other patients. When pediatricians keep unvaccinated families as clients, many believe they do so to convince the parents to vaccinate their children. Pediatricians may be reluctant to treat parents who refuse to vaccinate their kids. In a poll of pediatricians’ offices, 51% of them had a policy of kicking out families that refuse to vaccinate their children out of their practice. Dr. Kerr might consider contacting Child Welfare information gateway, a social service agency that provides counseling and support to children and their families and promotes child welfare. The doctor could seek an intervention from the Child Welfare information gateway to help. Ana receives medical attention (beneficence) and avoids any harm that could be done by failing to vaccinate her (non-maleficence) (Casali & Perano, 2021).
Dr. Kerr may be forced to override the ethical concept of autonomy by involving the child welfare information gateway. Still, the doctor must do so for Ana’s well-being. This is the body’s strategy for preventing sickness. Immunity Immune systems are not fully formed in newborns, which increases the risk of infection. Antibodies produced by vaccination function in conjunction with the body’s defense mechanisms to help your Child acquire immunity to disease. Dr. Kerr should seek the intervention of the Child Welfare Information gateway to help Ana, keeping the danger factor in mind.
Conclusion
Health care providers can use the four ethical values outlined above to help them work through ethical issues. Ana must choose between obeying her parents’ wishes and carrying out her professional responsibilities as a healthcare professional by assisting Ana in seeking medical attention in the case study scenario. Moreover, Patients can benefit from their doctors listening intently to their problems and displaying empathy and genuine concern for their well-being, as shown in this case study. Dr. Kerr’s moral awareness can be seen by the fact that he is aware of the circumstances behind Ana’s illness. Her moral judgment is evident in his attempt to encourage Ana’s parents to seek medical treatment for her.
References
Casali, G. L., & Perano, M. (2021). Forty years of research on factors influencing ethical decision making: Establishing a future research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 132, 614-630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.07.006
Guidolin, K., Catton, J., Rubin, B., Bell, J., Marangos, J., Munro-Heesters, A.,.. & Quereshy, F. (2021). Ethical decision making during a healthcare crisis: a resource allocation framework and tool. Journal of medical ethics. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2021-107255
Hill, H. A. L. D. Elams-Evans, David Yankey, James A. Singleton, and Yoojae Kang.“Vaccination Coverage Among Children Aged 19–35 Months–the United States, 2017. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67, 1123-1128. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6740a4external icon
Kemparaj, V. M., & Kadalur, U. G. (2018). Understanding the principles of ethics in health care: a systematic analysis of qualitative information. Int J Community Med Public Health, 5, 822-8. DOI:10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20180738
Latibjonovna, B. G. (2021). Ethics of the Relationship between the Medical Professional and the Patient System. International Journal of Development and Public Policy, 1(4), 115-120. http://openaccessjournals.eu/index.php/ijdpp/article/view/237
Miller, T. A., & Dimatteo, M. R. (2020). Physician-patient communication. The Wiley encyclopedia of health psychology, 469-474.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119057840.ch97
Opsahl, A., Nelson, T., Madeira, J., & Wonder, A. H. (2020). Evidence‐Based, Ethical Decision‐Making: Using Simulation to Teach the Application of Evidence and Ethics in Practice. Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, 17(6), 412-417. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12465
Ward, P. (2018). Trust and communication in a doctor-patient relationship: a literature review. Arch Med, 3(3), 36. DOI: 10.4172/2472-1654.100146