Examine the case of Baby Boy Doe (Darr, 2011, p. 16.) The objective of this assignment is to get you to think critically about real-life ethical dilemmas and the moral principals involved. There is no right or wrong answer, just try to look at this case subjectively. Most of the time, resolving ethical dilemmas is not so “black and white.” Discuss arguments for and against the issues below1. Discuss what makes this an ethical dilemma (read pp. 3 and 4).2. Discuss the implications of this study in terms of the moral principles described in chapter 1.Here are some questions that may guide your thinking:Respect for persons: Did the hospital/ physicians allow the parents to be autonomous in their decision-making? Do you see any elements of paternalism on behalf of the physicians?Beneficence: Did the hospital/ physicians act beneficently?Nonmaleficence: Did the hospital/ physicians consider nonmaleficence?Justice: Did the hospital act in a just way?3. Finally, do you think that the hospital did all that it could in this situation? Did it act appropriately? Explain.
Assignments are to be a minimum of 2 full pages of text and 3 reputable references in proper APA format.
Reference: Darr, K. (2011). Ethics in Health Services Management. (5th Edition). Baltimore, MD: Health Professions Press, Inc.
*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Assignment Instructions:
Please review the Weekly Assignment Grading Rubric prior to submission.
Make sure you read and understand the directions and requirements for each Assignment. Please ensure you cite your references in APA format with a minimum of 3 references (You may use your textbook as a reference and you should have a minimum of 2 academic outside references). Assignment will be graded based on the following areas: Foundation and synthesis of knowledge, application of knowledge critical thinking, writing skills, and organization of ideas and format. Refer to Library Online Resource Center for any research assistance. Refer to the Student Handbook for policies relevant to academic honesty and other procedures and policies related to this course.
Expert Solution Preview
Introduction:
The case of Baby Boy Doe presents an ethical dilemma that requires critical thinking and consideration of moral principles. This assignment aims to analyze this dilemma and explore the arguments for and against various ethical issues involved. The objective is to understand the complexities and subjectivity of resolving ethical dilemmas and to evaluate the hospital’s actions in this situation. This discussion will examine the ethical aspects, including respect for persons, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, in relation to the hospital’s decision-making process. Lastly, we will critically assess whether the hospital acted appropriately and if it did all that it could in this situation.
1. Discuss what makes this an ethical dilemma:
The case of Baby Boy Doe presents an ethical dilemma because it involves conflicting values and interests. On one hand, there is a desire to provide the best possible medical care for the child, while on the other hand, there is the consideration of respecting the autonomy and decision-making capability of the parents. This creates a tension between the principle of beneficence, which advocates for doing what is best for the patient, and the principle of respect for persons, which emphasizes the importance of patient autonomy. The ethical dilemma arises from the question of whether the hospital should have allowed the parents to make their own decisions or if paternalistic intervention was necessary for the well-being of the child.
2. Discuss the implications of this study in terms of the moral principles described in chapter 1:
Respect for persons: The hospital and physicians need to consider whether they allowed the parents to be autonomous in their decision-making. If the parents were not fully informed or coerced into a particular course of action, their autonomy may have been violated. On the other hand, if the parents were unable to make decisions that were in the best interest of the child due to lack of information or emotional distress, intervention might have been necessary to protect the child’s well-being.
Beneficence: The hospital and physicians need to evaluate whether they acted with beneficence, which means acting in the best interest of the patient. If the actions taken were in line with providing the best possible medical care for the child, then the principle of beneficence was upheld. However, if the hospital prioritized other factors, such as financial considerations or personal convenience, over the well-being of the child, then beneficence may not have been adequately addressed.
Nonmaleficence: The hospital and physicians need to consider if they considered nonmaleficence, which means avoiding harm to the patient. If the actions taken or decisions made resulted in harm to the child or if harm could have been avoided but was not, then nonmaleficence may have been compromised. The ethical dilemma lies in determining whether the chosen course of action resulted in the least harm overall.
Justice: The hospital’s actions should be analyzed in terms of justice, which relates to fairness and equity in the distribution of healthcare resources. If the hospital acted in a way that ensured equitable access to medical care for the child and treated the parents fairly, then justice would have been upheld. However, if there were biases or discriminatory practices involved in the decision-making process, justice may not have been achieved.
3. Finally, do you think that the hospital did all that it could in this situation? Did it act appropriately? Explain:
Evaluating whether the hospital did all that it could in this situation and acted appropriately requires careful consideration of the specific circumstances and available information. It is important to review the actions taken by the hospital and physicians, as well as any constraints or limitations they may have faced.
If the hospital took into account the moral principles discussed, including respect for persons, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, and made decisions based on a comprehensive analysis of the available information, then it can be argued that they acted appropriately. However, if there were any lapses in adhering to these principles or if other options were not adequately explored, then there may be grounds to question the appropriateness of their actions.
Ultimately, the assessment of whether the hospital did all that it could and acted appropriately is subjective and dependent on individual interpretations and perspectives. Ethical dilemmas often lack clear-cut solutions, and it is crucial to engage in open dialogue and critical analysis to reach well-informed conclusions.
