More handpicked essays just for you.
Seven principles of patient- clinician communication
Seven principles of patient- clinician communication
Cases involving medical malpractice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Henrietta Lacks John Moore was a leukemia patient that died at the age of 56 years old. He had his spleen removed because with the infection the doctor was worried that it was going to explode. Once his spleen was removed the tissue was then used in research by Dr. David Golde a researcher for UCLA (John Moors, 56; Sued to Share Profits from His Cells). John was never told about the research being done on his tissues, he was just asked by Dr. Golde to return to the UCLA medical center for follow up checkups, where doctors would take blood every time and still never mentioned anything about research to John.
A patient is admitted to Nightingale Community Hospital to the surgical unit following an infection to a post-op wound. There were several deficiencies found on the patient’s tracer audit once the patient was admitted to the hospital. One deficiency that was found was that the patient was given medication related to pain and the patient was not reassessed properly per Joint Commission Standards (JC). The deficiency found is within the pain assessment policy of the hospital.
The case I will be concentrating on is Tomcik vs. Ohio Dep’t of Rehabilitation and Correction in which Tomcik was imprisoned under the custody of Department of Rehabilitation and correction, based on the Legal and Ethical Issues for Health Professionals book. The problem stimulated from continuous negligence from nurses and doctors at the department, which initially was when Tomcik received a physical evaluation, included the breast examination by Dr. Evans who stated that the examination was cursory and lasted only a few seconds, which means that not much attention was presented regarding the patient and his job. The next day Tomcik noticed a lump as being about the size of a pea in her right breast, however it was not reported by Dr. Evans.
This is something that needs to be looked into more and more monitoring of how the nurses are able to treat their patients. There has been too many episodes where nurses just didn’t want to do their job like give meds when they were suppose to be administered or reporting when patients were in extreme
Regardless of that consent, Henrietta was still unaware of the sample taken before and after the treatment. The doctor should have clearly explained all procedures that were going to take place during that appointment. Henrietta’s inability to understand due to her lack of education and poor explanations from the employees at
Missed identification of shock symptoms in Ms. Gadner 2. IV infiltration being missed resulting in her not receiving fluid ordered 3. “Scanty documentation” depriving the physician of information on Ms. Gadner’s current condition 4. Administration of valium and morphine, contraindicated in shock, nursing not questioning the order 5. Didn’t communicate need for transfer to Dr. Dick.
The physician just doesn’t say no to treatment that they perceive futile but discuss alternatives. The patient and the family still need to be fully informed about the treatments that is considered nonbeneficial and the
Evans and the Ohio Department of Corrections failed Tomcik in applying basic ethical theories. Normative and applied ethics were not followed because the minimal standard of care in this case called for palpitation of the breasts, which was not done. If the physician knew that palpitation of the side of Tomcik’s breasts was the correct minimal procedure to detect cancer and he did not complete it, he failed to apply the theory of how he should behave. Deontological ethics were failed as the doctor was duty-bound to “do no harm or injustice”. (Greek Medicine, 2012)
She is also unsure whether the patient wishes to report this issue. The social worker was presented with the ethical dilemma of choosing between respecting the patient’s confidentiality or intervening to disclose and report the issue to the hospital
The doctors were allowed to stop treatment for that patient though. This is a moral code for doctors that is violated
All nurses and healthcare professionals are obligated to help patients and to follow through on the desire to good and not harm them. The doctors and nurses in the study did not hold up their obligation to give the participants in the study the best treatment for their disease. Since penicillin was being used for the treatment of penicillin in the 1940s, the doctors and nurses should have given the participants of the study the penicillin according to the ethical principle of beneficence. Instead of giving the participants the penicillin, the doctors and nurses continued with the original ‘treatment’ even though they knew it would not cure the participants’
His decision was influenced by his need to be alleviated of pain and Dr. Miracle was compelled by his own moral imperative. A moral imperative is the driving force for a person to make an action (Beauchamp 16-17). Dr. Miracle, as a physician, fulfilled his duty in providing medical attention, and Mr. Misery was aware of his opportunity to explore other options; his informed consent. Dr. Miracle did not undermine the physician-patient relationship as his action was driven by the guidelines of informed consent and his belief in improving Mr. Misery’s condition, his moral imperative. If Dr. Miracle had chosen to withhold the information of “serious side effects,” then he would be violating informed consent and his actions would be unjustified.
The practice of health care includes many scenarios that have to do with making adequate decisions when it comes to a patient’s life, and the way they are treated. Having an ethical code in all health care organizations is very important, because it helps health care workers with reaching a suited and ethical decision when it comes to the patient. In health care, patient will always be put first, and their autonomy will always be respected. Nevertheless, when there is a situation where a patient might be in harm, or might be making their condition worse because of the decisions they made. Health care workers will always be there to
Another doctor who was in the emergency room described the
Patients have a right to complain about the doctor's refusal to the Management. Provision of Treatment requires patient’s choice and informed consent. Even if a patient has signed a general consent clause, the patient can still refuse medical treatment or procedures. However, in exceptional or emergency situations a doctor may be legally justified in performing surgery or providing treatment without the patient's consent. The patient should be competent and capable of making such a decision to give a consent.
