PHI-413V WEEK3 DQ1&2 and Assignment

PHI-413V WEEK3 DQ1&2 and Assignment

PHI-413V WEEK3 DQ1&2 and Assignment

(2 Different Versions)

Write a 1,200-1,500 word analysis of “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy.” In light of the readings, be sure to address the following questions:

1. Under the Christian narrative and Christian vision, what sorts of issues are most pressing in this case study?PHI-413V WEEK3 DQ1&2 and Assignment
2. Should the physician allow Mike to continue making decisions that seem to him to be irrational and harmful to James?
3. According to the Christian narrative and the discussion of the issues of treatment refusal, patient autonomy, and organ donation in the topic readings, how might one analyze this case?
4. According to the topic readings and lecture, how ought the Christian think about sickness and health? What should Mike as a Christian do? How should he reason about trusting God and treating James?

Prepare assignment according to APA Style Guide. An abstract not required. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. Submit this assignment to Turnitin.

ORDER COMPREHENSIVE PHI-413V SOLUTIONS NOW

Case study: Healing and Autonomy Example Solution

First name Last name

Date

Introduction

As a staunch Christian, it is always imperative and essential to try and strike a balance between physical life and spiritual life. It is a norm for many Christians to mix acts of faith and believe in God with health issues. This has proven to have profound consequences on their daily lives and quality of living. Although it is a challenging undertaking for one to say that the truth of one’s faith is when faced with life uncertainties especially those to deal with health (Koopsen, 2010). The ethical question here arises about which way to take when making decisions pertaining to one’s health. Also, coming to terms with healthcare providers from a religious angle on the side to take in regards to the health of my household as a Christian is one of the most trivial decisions one can ever make (Fung, 2018). In this research, I will focus on Mike and Joanne a couple faced with a critical dilemma decision item regarding the health of their son James who is affected by a life-threatening illness.

James, their son is suffering from kidney failure problem and therefore needs dialysis on a frequent basis and an eventual transplant due to the deteriorated critical stage of his condition. James condition has deteriorated to an acute level due to his parent’s indecisions of withholding dialysis care and choosing faith over hospital care. Mike and Joanne are faced with the biggest ethical dilemma of balancing between the law of autonomy that prescribes that physicians not only have   the obligations to let the patients or their parents and guardians enforce decisions about their physical health and also prescribe the condition under which those decisions would be enacted as well as the principle of beneficence (Synder, 2012). This tenet of beneficence obliges that physician ought to at all times help their patients preserve life by doing all within their power and scope. Thus according to these case study, there is a clear conflict between Mike and Joann who are James parents, autonomous decision and the physician’s beneficent professional responsibility to look out and work out for utmost patient best interest.

According to Link (2012), Christians perceive sickness as a reflection through which Gods care for sinners is manifested through healing as a reward of God’s victory over sin and nay of man’s trouble. Thus Mike and Joanne opt for faith healing as per the spiritual Christian doctrine outlined in the bible. The worsening condition of their son’s health forces Mike to make a turn on their faith and decide to proceed with clinical care by a health specialist. The clinical care is divided into dialysis which is the preliminary stage of the treatment and kidney transplant, the eventual therapeutic plan for clinical remedy of the kidney (Johnsen, 2014). The framework of the essay is on Christian principles and its implications for ethical decision making

The most tenacious issue in the case study is the basic fact that James, an eight-year-old boy is in dire need of medical attention due to the serious condition ailing him of kidney failure. James herein as not reached the age of making own autonomous decision which merits the parents to decide on his behalf. The parent’s decision on how to handle the matter causes a clash between faith and health which further puts their son’s life to more danger. In this case scenario, Mike and Joanne decide their quest in the temptation to test their faith in God which is a good spiritual ideal to do, however, it helps to degenerate their son’s condition from good to worse. Secondly, the physician opinion on the matter fails to intervene and inform correctly on the matter. These begs for the question of whether clinicians and physicians should interfere with a patient spiritual faith and standings or act against a patient spiritual doctrine, in case they are convinced that the patient condition is worsening (Koopsen, 2010). Focusing on the scenario at hand, James condition would not have deteriorated had the physician acted according to his self-will and conviction. The article clearly shows no indications of the physicians trying to persuade Mike and Joanne to allow their sons James take the treatment. Despite the observations of the dilapidated condition James was on, the physicians cooperate with the parents in withholding treatment to such a crucial delicate case of ailment.

Another vital aspect in the case study is the fundamental question on who should take responsibility for James worsened the state of health affairs. Is it the physicians or the parents? The doctor herein knew vividly well that James needed immediate medical checkup but never took the initiative of taking swift action against Mike and Joanne opinion of foregoing dialysis for their son’s critical health. Conversely, James parents in their pursuit of faith helped in the proliferation of their son’s condition by holding on to faith even when it seemed that the situation was not getting any better. Whereas there are no rules that guide against their individual actions, should they still be held responsible for each of their action on the above matter of mere negligence to offer care to a critically ill patient (Dubbler, 2002)? Should a doctor permit parents such as Mike and Joanne continue making poor inept decisions for a sick minor.

This case study lays emphasis on various pertinent ethical issues. First and foremost, it is of essence that the doctor in charge provides Mike with the expected outcomes of their therapeutic plan and the treatment options available for their son. In addition, the physician ought to provide a list of suggestions to Mike and Joanne on the way they should proceed with offering care to their son based on the wealth of knowledge and expertise they hold. The physicians have no option but to speak the gospel truth, their professional responsibility is to speak what is right and genuine but not to tell the parents what they desire to hear (Synder, 2012). The obligation and responsibility of a physician when presented with such a case as James’s is to deploy their expertise and skills to inform the parents whereas still respecting the freedom that they could also disagree on the whole treatment plan (Scott, 2000).

Another ethical aspect brought into light in the case study is that besides the parents being informed of the need for dialysis for their son’s critical condition. They chose the path of faith, Mike and Joanne decided to withhold the treatment program and opt for a healing service. The healing path resulted in worsening of John’s condition and brought the theme of suspense to the parents on which way to go for their son’s healing and recovery (Cutas, 2012). Ultimately the situation deteriorated from worse to critically unstable and forced them to rush into the clinical therapeutic treatment.

The case study brings a conclusion that finding a common ground between healthcare and spirituality is a difficult undertaking that always causes divisions between the parties involved as seen in James case. The research established that Mike and Joanne profound believe and faith in God made things worse for the doctor to perform the prescribed medical procedure on James and facilitated to the deterioration of their son’s condition to acute levels. Therefore there is a need for striking of a balance between the religious beliefs and autonomous of a person’s decisions based on valid reason   and provided that patients are within the bounds of making   their own autonomous decisions regarding their daily lives then the physician should always strive to respect such decisions as they can only offer a guide to such situations but not influence their decisions to the patients.

References (PHI-413V WEEK3 DQ1&2 and Assignment)

Fletcher, J. F. (2015). Situation ethics: The new morality. Westminster John Knox Press.

Munthe, C., Sandman, L., & Cutas, D. (2012). Person-centered care and shared decision making: implications for ethics, public health, and research. Health Care Analysis, 20(3), 231-249.

Link, J. (2012). In Their Own Words: Stories of Healing & Practices for the Church. Lulu. com.

Morreim, E. H. (2007). Balancing act: the new medical ethics of medicine’s new economics (Vol. 3). Springer Science & Business Media.

Peteet, J., Dell, M. L., & Fung, W. L. A. (Eds.). (2018). Ethical considerations at the intersection of psychiatry and religion. Oxford University Press.

Post, L. F., Blustein, J., Gordon, E., & Dubler, N. N. (2006). Pain: ethics, culture, and informed consent to relief. The Journal of law, medicine & ethics, 24(4), 348-359.

Ramsey, P., Farley, M. A., & Jonsen, A. R. (2014). The patient as a person: explorations in medical ethics. Yale University Press.

Scott, C. (2000). Why Law Prevades Medicine: An Essay on Ethics in Health Care. Notre Dame JL Ethics & Pub. Poly, 14, 245.

Snyder, L. (2012). American College of Physicians ethics manual. Annals of Internal Medicine, 156(1_Part_2), 73-104.

Young, C., & Koopsen, C. (2010). Spirituality, health, and healing: An integrative approach. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.PHI-413V WEEK3 DQ1&2 and Assignment