Aspen N520 Legal and Ethical Issues in Health Care Module 6 Assignment
l and Ethical Issues in Health Care
Module 6 Assignment
Professional Development Exercises :
Read the case study presented at the end of Chapter 8 (Guido, p. 150)
Is the patient correct in asserting that he has a right to know the names and status of individuals who will be performing this procedure?
Does the manner in which the student introduced herself and the two other team members have relevance in this case?
Was the informed consent deficient to the degree that there was a lack of informed consent by the patient?
How would you decide this case?
A patient is admitted to your surgical center for a breast biopsy under local anesthesia. The surgeon has previously informed the patient of the procedure, risks, alternatives, desired outcomes, and possible complications. You give the surgery permit form to the patient for her signature. She readily states that she knows about the procedure and has no additional questions; she signs the form with no hesitation. Her husband, who is visiting with her, says he is worried that something may be said during the procedure to alarm his wife. What do you do at this point? Do you alert the surgeon that informed consent has not been obtained? Do you request that the surgeon revisit the patient and reinstruct her about the surgery? Since the patient has already signed the form, is there anything more you should do?
Now consider the ethical issues that such a scenario raises. Which ethical principles is the husband in this example most portraying? Which ethical principles should guide the nurse in working with this patient and family member?
Jimmy Chang, a 20- year- old college student, is admitted to your institution for additional chemotherapy. Jimmy was diagnosed with leukemia 5 years earlier and has had several courses of chemotherapy. He is currently in an acute active phase of the disease, though he had enjoyed a 14- month remission phase prior to this admission. His parents, who accompany him to the hospital, are divided as to the benefits of additional chemotherapy. His mother is adamant that she will sign the informed consent form for this course of therapy, and his father is equally adamant that he will refuse to sign the informed consent form because “Jimmy has suffered enough.”
You are his primary nurse and must assist in somehow resolving this impasse. What do you do about the informed consent form? Who signs and why? Using the MORAL model, decide the best course of action for Jimmy from an ethical perspective rather than a legal perspective. Did you come to the same conclusion using both an ethical and a legal approach?
Please combine all of these responses into a single Microsoft Word document for submission
Please submit only complete assignments (not partial or “draft” assignments). Submit only the assignments corresponding to the module in this section.
You are not required to adhere to the 500-1000 word count for each of the responses, but please be thorough in your responses so that you adequately address all aspects of each question.
A Right to Experimental Drugs
Experimental drugs are usually in the process of being studied to identify if it alleviates a disease or medical condition. They are used when there are limited treatment options available or no approved drugs available to treat a disease. They are also prescribed if there are promising early study results for a specific investigational drug. The purpose of this paper is to identify and defend my view on the use of experimental drugs and discuss related ethics.
Relevant Ethical Theories and Moral Principles
The relevant ethical theories to the issue of the use of experimental drugs are teleology and deontology. Teleology states that the value of a situation is determined by its consequences. On the other hand, Deontology considers the intrinsic significance of the act itself as the criterion for the determination of good. The ethics of using an experimental drug would be determined using deontology by considering the motives of the prescriber and not the drug’s outcomes. The relevant moral principles are beneficence and nonmaleficence. Beneficence would require the prescriber to prescribe a drug that will improve the patient’s outcome and balance the drug’s benefits and potential risks (Munson, 2014). Nonmaleficence would require that the experimental drug cause no harm to the patient and the treatment must offer a reasonable prospect of benefit.
How the Principle of Informed Consent Is Relevant To the Issue
Informed consent is based on a patient’s right to decide for themselves. Informed consent involves facilitating the patient’s understanding of the experimental treatment, giving them adequate time to ask questions, and continuing to provide information on the drug (Pietrzykowski & Smilowska, 2021). Before patients give consent to be treated with an experimental drug, they must understand that: The drug may not benefit them; They may be exposed to unknown side effects; They are getting into a treatment that may vary from the standard medical practices.
The Costs and Benefits of Making Unproven, Unapproved Experimental Drugs Widely Available To Patients
Most unapproved experimental drugs availed and sold to the public offer negligible or no evidence-based therapeutic efficacy and safety to patients. This leads to losses since individuals purchase drugs that do not benefit them. Unapproved experimental drugs can also lead to high healthcare costs from treating adverse effects from the drugs. This is because they have an inherent safety risk that may potentially cause more harm to the patient or even death since they have not undergone rigorous testing (Mahant, 2020). Nevertheless, making experimental drugs available has the benefit of providing treatment for conditions with limited or no approved medications (Van Norman, 2018). When an experimental drug produces desirable outcomes it guides prescribers in making treatment decisions for patients who present with similar diseases in the future.
Arguments For and Against Offering Pre-Approved Drugs to Wider Pools of Patients
I support prescribing pre-approved drugs to wider pools of patients since it increases treatment options for various diseases mostly with limited options. It avails treatment to patients with serious or life-threatening diseases, and those with no comparable therapy or satisfactory alternative therapy. The pre-approved drugs have the potential to improve the quality of life of patients with extremely debilitating and painful conditions (Mahant, 2020). This upholds the ethical principle of beneficence since the prescriber seeks to provide benefit to patients. However, I advocate that autonomy be promoted when prescribing experimental drugs by giving the patient the right to choose their treatment and the ability to act on that choice. Teleology can be applied to judge the prescription of experimental drugs as good or bad by looking at the outcome of the drug’s action.
Conclusion
Ethical theories relevant to experimental drugs are teleology and deontology, while moral principles include beneficence and nonmaleficence. Informed consent entails providing the patient with adequate information about the drug to allow them to make an informed decision about proceeding with treatment. Experimental drugs can increase costs if they are ineffective and contribute to adverse effects but can also promote desirable outcomes.
References
Mahant, V. (2020). “Right-to-Try” experimental drugs: an overview. Journal of Translational Medicine, 18(1), 253. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02427-4
Munson, R. (2014). Intervention and reflection: Basic issues in bioethics (concise ed.). Wadsworth.
Pietrzykowski, T., & Smilowska, K. (2021). The reality of informed consent: empirical studies on patient comprehension—a systematic review. Trials, 22, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04969-w
Van Norman, G. A. (2018). Expanding Patient Access to Investigational Drugs: Single Patient Investigational New Drug and the “Right to Try”. JACC. Basic to translational science, 3(2), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacbts.2017.11.007