Patient Autonomy Case Study

In this case, we can clearly see the abuse of patient autonomy of the two children because of their parents. The neglect of medical treatment for a common infection would be on parallel for murder if this case did not involve religious evidence to support the parents. The case itself is a difficulty. First, children under the age of 18 legal authority are given to the parents (this also includes patient autonomy). Then, the parents are part of a religious group that doesn’t allow the use of modern medicine. And finally, the United States first amendment of freedom of speech and religion. This means the kids are unable to receive any treatment due to their parents’ religious grounds. Though this issue has already been solved, the dilemma is still at large. Should children’s autonomy be completely controlled by their parents? Is parents’ paternalism acceptable even though it’s medically unwise? Should we allow religious expression to prevent patient treatment? First off, we could have played off the original case, neglect

Especially when the parents are unable to understand the dangers or refuse treatment. And if the safety of the child’s life is at risk, the hospital must report it to the authorities. This would allow the use of child protective services on either grounds of neglect or imminent danger. This would then allow a prominent legal guardian to take place and medical treatment can swiftly be treated as reports are being made. This approach may seem very plausible due to the nature of the case being mainly based on child negligence. But this does have a downside. Both the authorities who are writing the report and the child protective services fall under the state. If the state exempts the parents’ action due to religious expression, then CPS and the police must restrain their ability to do anything about