HCS 335 Assignment Week 4 Biomedical Ethics Paper (Abortion)

HCS 335 Assignment Week 4 Biomedical Ethics Paper (Abortion)

HCS 335 Assignment Week 4 Biomedical Ethics Paper (Abortion)

This assignment allows you to explore a current topic related to biomedical ethics. As an administrator, it is important to stay up-to-date with current ethical issues in health care.

Select one of the following issues:

Transplants and rationing

Xenotransplants (cross-species transplants)

Abortion

In vitro fertilization (IVF)

Eugenics (good genes)

Withdrawal of life support

Physician assisted suicide (PAS)

Stem cell research

Bioterror

Cryonics (freeze and reanimate the deceased)

Write a 850-word paper that discusses the biomedical ethics issue you selected. Use headings and subheadings for clarity to ensure that you have covered all required points in the paper. Your paper should:

Include an introduction and conclusion.

Describe your topic, include current research, news, and information.

Explain the ethical issues related to your topic.

Explain how human subject protections may apply to your topic.

Explain how informed consent may apply to your topic.

Explain how an advanced directive or a surrogate decision maker could impact your topic.

Identify five recommendations based on the ethical issues you identified to ensure ethical choices are made in regard to your topic in the future.

Cite at least 2 reputable references. One reference must be your textbook. Reputable references include trade or industry publications, government or agency websites, scholarly works, a textbook, or other sources of similar quality.

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: HCS 335 Assignment Week 4 Biomedical Ethics Paper (Abortion)

Healthcare providers, patients, and families interpret health issues differently depending on their varying worldviews. The Christian worldview guides individuals in making ethical decisions and addressing dilemmas. Regardless of the complexity of an issue, healthcare providers should apply the principles of medical ethics effectively. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the application of medical ethics and the Christian worldview in the healing and autonomy case study.

Part 1: Chart (60 points)

Based on the reading of the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and topic Resources, use the four boxes approach to organize relevant ethical issues related to the four principles (beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect for autonomy, and justice). Provide the information by means of bullet points with complete sentences in the box. Gather as much data as possible.

Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence	Patient Preferences Autonomy
·         All medical interventions, including dialysis and kidney transplant, should benefit James by promoting healing. ·         The attending physician cannot commence dialysis without the parents’ consent.	·         James’ parents opt for faith healing ·         The attending physician must respect James’ parents’ independent decisions. ·         Parents should be allowed to decide on matters regarding dialysis and kidney transplant.
Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy	Contextual Features Justice and Fairness
·         Medications and evidence-based treatments prevent health deterioration. ·         Delaying the dialysis worsens the patient’s health, which violates beneficence and nonmaleficence recommendations. ·         Respecting parents’ autonomous decision-making delays healing, hampering the child’s quality of life.	·         All resources for promoting healing should be fairly shared. ·         The attending physician and other care providers should ensure James gets adequate access to all resources necessary for preserving life and promoting healing.

 

Part 2: Evaluation

Answer each of the following questions about how the four principles approach and four boxes approach would be applied:

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: HCS 335 Assignment Week 4 Biomedical Ethics Paper (Abortion)

1. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how would each of the principles be specified in this case? Explain why. (45 points)

The Christian worldview interprets issues according to how God would want them to be. Diseases, healing, and faith in God are usually interlinked to understand them better. Medical ethics obligates healthcare professionals to benefit others, especially those with whom they have a special relationship (Hoehner, 2020). In the health context, beneficence extends crucial Christian values, such as mercy, kindness, and altruism. This is usually visible when healthcare professionals provide care to those who cannot afford it. Care characterized by merciful and kind acts implies acting according to God’s will and plan for humans. All humans are created in God’s image and should help each other live a quality life. Nonmaleficence involves a commitment to preventing harmful acts (Hoehner, 2020). Due to the intrinsic value of human life, everyone is morally prohibited from causing unjustified harm to others. Therefore, all healthcare providers cannot act in a way that harms James. Autonomy implies respecting patients’ and their families’ independent decisions. To facilitate autonomy, the attending physician should ensure James’ family has adequate information about the health interventions and their expected outcomes. Justice is defined as providing what is merited with fairness and impartiality (Hoehner, 2020). Christians are morally obligated to advocate for the underprivileged and vulnerable to ensure equal and equitable access to healthcare resources. As the justice principle recommends, no one, including James, should be shown favor or deference in their treatment or care.

 

2. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian weigh and balance each of the four principles in this case? Explain why. (45 points)

Weighing and balancing the four principles of medical ethics could be challenging in complex situations like the case study. According to Hoehner (2020), weighing and balancing these principles involves determining how to apply them when they conflict while guided by moral beliefs and reasoning. When balancing beneficence and nonmaleficence, healthcare providers should always strive to provide care whose benefits outweigh the risks. This commitment aligns with the foundations of virtue-based care, which recommends providing nursing care of the highest moral standards (Fowler & Schoonover-Shoffner,2023). In this case, nursing professionals should consistently remember their call to relieve pain and suffering to the furthest possible. Although it may be easy to weigh and balance beneficence and nonmaleficence, it can be challenging for healthcare professionals when autonomy comes into the equation. Despite healthcare providers’ medical knowledge, patients must determine whether an intervention is appropriate depending on individual judgments (Hoehner, 2020). Despite the call for autonomy, healthcare providers cannot provide patients and their surrogates with any treatment they request. They can refuse risky and unbeneficial treatments. In James’ scenario, the attending physician and other care providers must weigh risks, benefits, and burdens and ensure the preferred treatment maximizes healing and prevents health complications. In all situations, healthcare providers must act justly and ensure the best treatment possible depending on the available resources. Since weighing and balancing are not about ordering moral principles, the care providers’ primary goal should be acting consistently with moral standards in every process.

 

Conclusion

The Christian worldview is founded on acting morally as God commands his people. Therefore, balancing and weighing ethical principles in the case study revolve around observing the highest moral standards as the Bible instructs Christians. As healthcare providers make decisions that achieve the best possible care for James, they must maximize benefits while reducing risks/harms significantly. Despite the significance of autonomy, healthcare providers are ethically mandated to turn down harmful treatment requests.

References

Fowler, M. D., & Schoonover-Shoffner, K. (2023). Rising to “the highest morals”-the rich history of nursing ethics. Journal of Christian Nursing: a Quarterly Publication of Nurses Christian Fellowship, 40(2), 86–95. https://doi.org/10.1097/CNJ.000000000000103

Hoehner, P. J. (2020). Biomedical ethics in the Christian narrative. Grand Canyon University. https://lc.gcumedia.com/phi413v/practicing-dignity-an-introduction-to-christian-values-and-decision-making-in-health-care/v1.1/#/chapter/3