PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved

PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved

Grand Canyon University PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved-Step-By-Step Guide

 

This guide will demonstrate how to complete the PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.

 

How to Research and Prepare for PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved                                   

 

Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Grand Canyon University   PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.

 

After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.

 

How to Write the Introduction for PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved                                   

 

The introduction for the Grand Canyon University   PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.

 

How to Write the Body for PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved                                   

 

After the introduction, move into the main part of the PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.

 

Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.

 

How to Write the Conclusion for PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved                                   

 

After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.

 

How to Format the References List for PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved                                   

 

The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.

Stuck? Let Us Help You

 

Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease. 

 

Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW. 

 

Based on the \”Case Study: Healing and Autonomy\” and other required topic study materials, you will complete the \”Applying the Four Principles: Case Study\” document that includes the following:

Part 1: Chart

This chart will formalize the four principles and four boxes approach and the four-boxes approach by organizing the data from the case study according to the relevant principles of biomedical ethics: autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice.

Part 2: Evaluation

This part includes questions, to be answered in a total of 500 words, that describe how principalism would be applied according to the Christian worldview.

Sample Answer for PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved

Every single one of us, in my view, has value. Humans were created in God’s likeness and are tasked with carrying out God’s plan for the planet. Everything happens for a reason, and I think that God has a purpose for everyone of us, even if we don’t recognize it or comprehend it. Individuals, in my opinion, have the right to make their own decisions. Abortion, in my opinion, may be justified in extreme circumstances, such as when the mother’s life is endangered by pregnancy difficulties or when the pregnancy is the consequence of rape. I believe that when two consenting adults participate in an action that is known to result in pregnancy and that pregnancy occurs, the result should be acknowledged and supported as a matter of principle and duty. M

y position, on the other hand, cannot supersede an individual’s right to self-determination, therefore I am pro-choice. Because they have an influence on human life, bioethical concerns, abortion, designer babies, and stem cell research are all contentious. The issue is whether these things are good or destructive to God’s creation of human life. I support stem cell research because studies show that this science has the potential to heal or cure a wide range of ailments. When the issue of “designer babies” is discussed in the context of reducing the possibility of birth malformations and disabilities, it looks to be a promising one. On the other side, prospective parents are emotionally and financially committed in this therapy. Because of this investment and medical science’s expanding ability to modify gender and other physical features, we risk enticing people into fantasizing about and attempting to make the “ideal kid”. Therefore, I don’t support” designer babies”.

Part 1: Chart (60 points)

Healthcare providers need to uphold the biomedical principles when treating patients and incorporate their views, especially based on the concept of cultural competence. In this case, Mike and Joanne and their sick child, James, make decisions concerning his treatment based on these principles. The purpose of this assignment is to analyze how they apply the four principles and offer a Christian narrative based on concepts related to the case.

Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence	Patient Preferences Autonomy
Medical indications denote to clinical information that is needed for diagnosing a patient to understand that level of severity of their medical or health condition. Beneficence acting in the best interests and intents for a patient to ensure that they attain positive outcomes (Gillon, 2018). Non-maleficence implores the physician not to do any harm to patients. In this case, after the initial diagnosis, the physician recommended treatment interventions for James with the intent to improve his condition. However, the parents decided to take him to church for a miracle service but the intervention did not work. They brought him back and the physician placed James on immediate dialysis with the need for a kidney transplant as the long-term solution. The actions by the physician demonstrates that he based his decisions on medical indications of James condition. Further, he observed beneficence as his intents are to treat James and not to harm him. The decisions by the parents were exercised based on the principle of autonomy.	Patient preferences entail the expressed choices of a patient or their substantive decision makers based on the principle of autonomy. The principle of autonomy is critical in medical and health as it implores the providers to respect patient’s preferences based on their right to make decisions. Patients have the right to exercise decisions and select the kind of care they want based on provided information by physicians and other healthcare providers (Gillon, 2018). In this case, James is a minor and cannot exercise autonomy rights, implying that his parents make decisions on his behalf. James’ parents make the decisions to bring him to the nephrologist and later to their church without consulting him. The physician and his team do not interfere in the decisions but offer all information concerning the appropriate treatment interventions for James. The parents express their preferences when the physician gives them all available options that include immediate dialysis and later on when the condition worsens, a kidney transplant.
Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy	Contextual Features Justice and Fairness
Quality of life describes the relevant medical characteristics of life of a patient prior to and after getting treatment. Beneficence, non-maleficence and autonomy are essential in demonstrating the quality of interventions that care providers offer to patients (Owoc et al., 2018). James’ condition was worse before the current intervention of having a dialysis. The physician recommends a kidney transplant as the intervention that will have a permanent impact on James’ quality of life. In this case, the previous actions by the physician show that he values the principles of autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence (Singsuriya, 2018). The parents’ decisions also demonstrate their exercising of these principles as they make preferences based on autonomy and acted with the hope of best interests for their child.	Contextual issues focus on the legal, social and familial aspects that influence one’s medical condition. Justice and fairness implore stakeholders to make decisions that demonstrate equity, and appropriate allocation of resources to patients without any discrimination (Young, 2017). For instance, distributive justice impacts a physician’s decisions and actions on patients using moral values and perspectives like equality and equity. The case study demonstrates that despite the decisions that the parents took concerning James and brought him to church, he should continue treating him well. Fairness and justice mandate the physician to make best decisions and deploy necessary resources to treat James so that he gets better (Owoc et al., 2018). In this case, the physician recommends a kidney transplant as the most effective solution to James’ condition.

Part 2: Evaluation

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

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

The Christian worldview considers medical interventions as essential in one’s life and demonstrate the power of God. The principle of autonomy implores adults to make treatment decisions based on their inherent abilities and dignity as human beings created in God’s image. Christians believe that faith should be based on action. However, Mike and Joanne misinterpreted the biblical teaching on faith and healing by taking their son to church for miracle prayers without medical interventions. Their decision was based on autonomy. They believed that seeking medical treatment showed lack of faith in God. The second principle is beneficence which requires physicians and other healthcare providers to have best interests of patients and offer interventions that benefit them. Every physician must consider the patient’s benefits before their own. The principle of non-maleficence is based on the need of not harming a patient, just like the Christian teaching on loving one’s neighbor and not inflicting any undesirable things in them (Carr & Winslow, 2017). Physicians have a legal and professional obligation to protect patients’ health at all costs. The physicians have the responsibility to protect their patients from harm. The implication is that healthcare providers, including physicians, should ensure that they minimize harm that could jeopardize health. The final principle to be specified and weighted is justice which requires physicians and patients to treat each other fairly in their facilities and in society. Christian teaching emphasize the need to treat the afflicted fairly and ensure that they attain their needs. Physicians should uphold justice and fairness in their actions and decisions concerning patients.

 

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

A Christian should balance the four core principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. All these principles are bounded by the commandment of love as demonstrated in Mathew 22:39; Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself (NIV). Every individual must demonstrate values like love, kindness, passion and faithfulness in their endeavors and actions in daily life. While principles like autonomy may contradict biblical teachings, Christians should illustrate their faith by accepting treatment and seeking God for healing. Christian must seek treatment with the faith and hope that they will be cured through God’s intervention (Carr & Winslow, 2017). The implication is that while they have the right to make decisions and choices, Christians must always ensure that their interventions confer benefits, do not create harm, are fair and just, and do not contradict existing Christian teachings as prescribed in the bible. On their part, physicians and other healthcare providers should be guided by values of humanity and know that each decision they make has significant repercussions on patients, their families and society. physicians should guide their patients in making better decisions with their best interests and not causing harm to them. Such decisions should influence their health by ensuring that they have quality care outcomes. Physicians should dedicate their time and efforts to saving lives and exercising the ethical principles as outlined in their code of professional conduct. The implication is that both patients and physicians have a responsibility to observe ethical principles, especially from a Christian perspective, and get better outcomes from the medical interventions by balancing these principles well.

References:

Carr, M. F., & Winslow, G. R. (2017). From conceptual to concrete. In World Religions for

            Healthcare Professionals (pp. 31-45). Routledge.

Gillon, R. (2018). Principlism, virtuism, and the spirit of oneness. In Healthcare Ethics, Law and

            Professionalism (pp. 45-59). Routledge.

Owoc, M. S., Kozin, E. D., Riemenschneider, A., Duarte, M. J., Hight, A. E., Clay, M., … &

Briggs, S. (2018). Medical and bioethical considerations in elective cochlear implant

array removal. Journal of medical ethics, 44(3), 174-179.

Singsuriya, P. (2018). Ethics of Caring Conversation and Dialectic of Love and Justice. Nursing

Ethics, 25(4), 436-443. doi: 10.1177/0969733016654313.

Young, G. (2017). The Five Core and the Five Supplementary Ethical Principles and Their Sub-

principles. In Revising the APA Ethics Code (pp. 63-91). Springer, Cham.

Sample Answer 2 for PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved

Part 1: Chart

Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence In order to make a diagnosis and determine treatment options, there is a need to assess medical indications exhibited by a patient. Beneficence refers to a health professional acting with best intentions to provide care to patients whereas non-beneficence encourages care providers not to do harm (Gillon, 2018). As per the case study, the surrogates of James acted in the best interest of the patient even the medical condition of James would still be worse even when treated.	Patient Preferences Autonomy Autonomy refers to the right of patients to express their choice or make a decision of care yet to be administered to them (Gillon, 2018). Even though James is an underage child, his right to autonomy must be upheld. The parents ought to have consulted the patient before making a decision on care.  The physician had limited influence to alter the decisions made by the parents.
Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy In the healthcare setting, quality of life entail the medical features of a patient after a therapy has been administered (Gillon, 2018). As per the case study, the health condition of James was worst but improved significantly after dialysis. Conversely, the patient needs a renal replacement therapy involving a kidney transplant to improve the quality of his life. His brother can donate to him his kidney but his father has an opinion to rely on faith regarding the health status of James. The parents, however, should consult James regarding the issue because the last time they relied on faith his condition worsened (Gillon, 2018). The parents should act in the best interest so that the brother can donate the kidney to optimize the quality of health for James.	Contextual Feature Justice and Fairness Medical decision can greatly be influenced by familial and social factors as well as legal considerations. In the case study, James’ parents relied on faith when making decision for the health status of their son (Gillon, 2018). They focused more on religious beliefs for healing rather than receiving kidney from his bother. However, the conflict of interest arose when there was a mismatch of cells between James and his brother meaning that the latter could not donate his kidney. This made the parents were therefore willing to donate the kidney and even appealed for the goodwill of well-wishers to offer this vital organ.

 

Part 2: Evaluation

Four Principles most Pressing according to Christian worldview

In the Christian perspectives, beneficence emerge as the principle with the most pressing issue pertaining to the health of a patient. The argument is guided by the premise that James’ parents made decision in the interest of their ailing son. They blindly believed that James would be healed with the support from their daily prayers (SSorajjakool et al., 2017). In this context, the parents relied more on prayers rather than providing kidney to support the life of James. Other than medical support, the parents had faith that prayers also work. No one can criticize their approach and perception in life considering that they made attempts to address the health of their son despite his deteriorating health (Hubbell, Kauschinger & Oermann, 2017). They were also against the idea about the brother donating one of his kidneys to the ailing James. All these actions affirm that the parents cared for the health status of their children. In fact, when the health status of James deteriorated while receiving homecare, they took him back to the care facility for further examination. With this, the parents aimed at addressing the health of their son despite wrong decisions that they sometimes made with regard to his care.

How a Christian might rank the Priority of the Four Principles

In an approach of health, a Christian can give priority to the four principles by starting with beneficence as it is based on one’s goodwill regarding the health of others. According to Christian teachings, parents need to provide love to their children and this is consistent with the principle of beneficence (SSorajjakool et al., 2017). The second priority goes to nonmaleficence which points as doing no harm to patients. Christian parents should not intend or initiate activities that harm their children. The principle is based on the Christian teaching that human life is sacred and that it should be protected by everyone. Justice and fairness are ranked the third as they ensure that health service delivery is provided without preferential treatment to anyone. In Christian teaching, every human being is equal before God and this should be demonstrated during provision of care. The last ranking on the list will be autonomy which ensures that patients make decisions on medical services provided to them. Christians need to allow their patients to choose their option of care and this decision must be respected (Hubbell, Kauschinger & Oermann, 2017). The premise ensures that the dignity of every person is upheld so that one receives quality service to improve on their well-being.

References

Gillon, R. (2018). Principlism, virtuism, and the spirit of oneness. In Healthcare Ethics, Law and Professionalism (pp. 45-59). Routledge.

Hubbell, S. L., Kauschinger, E., & Oermann, M. (2017). Development and Implementation of an Educational Module to Increase Nurses’ Comfort With Spiritual Care in an Inpatient Setting. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 48(8), 358-364.

SSorajjakool, S., Carr, M. F., Nam, J. J., Sorajjakool, S., & Bursey, E. (2017). World religions for healthcare professionals. Routledge.

Sample Answer 3 for PHI-413V Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Solved

Based on the “Healing and Autonomy” case study, fill out all the relevant boxes below. Provide the information by means of bullet points or a well-structured paragraph in the box. Gather as much data as possible.

 

Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence	Patient Preferences Autonomy
Medical indication denotes the signals for or against a specific response based on the recognition of the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. The implication is that any intervention to a patient should have a benefit and not do any harm to a patient (Ediger, 2015). A medical indication also helps to show the severity of a health problem experienced by a patient. Physicians and other health providers should act with the best intentions while caring for a patient (Bibler et al., 2018). In this case, the physician believes that James requires immediate dialysis, but his parents do not want because of their faith in God. The physician intends to benefit the patient and ensure that no harm occurs. However, the parents also have no intention of harming their child. For instance, they decide to bring him back to ensure that his condition improves.	Patient preferences appreciate the principle of respect for independence and autonomy in choosing to have a treatment intervention or not (Bibler et al., 2018). Health care providers must consider the competence of a patient to make decisions free from any coercion or pressure from others like family members or physicians. The choice and decision to have care or treatment must be voluntary (Ediger, 2015). In this case study, the patient is a minor who cannot exercise autonomy. The parents make decisions for him because of being underage. However, they need to consult him before making any decisions and choices. Further, the physician should also make the parents aware of the patient’s right to preferences based on his autonomy in the situation.
Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy	Contextual Features Justice and Fairness
Quality of life means that any injury, particularly when its extent is not known, may constitute both real and perceived threats to one’s life (Ediger, 2015). The aspect represents the biomedical ethics of beneficence, respect for autonomy, and non-maleficence. In this case, healthcare providers have to ensure that patients have essential medical features of life before and after treatment. In the case study, James’ condition is worse and requires immediate intervention. The first refusal by the parents for their son to have initial dialysis makes the state more delicate. However, the dialysis process offers a positive change based on the outcome. The condition can become better through a kidney transplant, and this can only happen if the parents agree to have James’ brother give his kidney since it is the only one matching. By depending on their faith for God’s intervention, the parents are not acting in the best interest and benefit of James (Orr, 2015). They are risking and increasing potential harm that may arise due to a lack of a transplant and subsequent failure of the kidney.	Contextual features implore on practitioners to know that harm or medical problems are dependent on a more substantial situational analysis of several factors. Further, this component advances that clinical decisions are not made in a vacuum but require input from different individuals in determining the course of action (Ediger, 2015). In this case, James’ parents’ faith made them believe that he will get healed and did not consider the need for dialysis in the initial stages. After reporting back and upon commencement of the process, it emerges that James requires a transplant since the dialysis is a temporary solution. Contextual features consider justice and fairness, and based on the case; it is clear that a conflict of interest exists (Bibler et al., 2018). Parents do not want to subject James’ brother to a similar situation, yet a transplant will help in the long term. Imperatively, a conflict of interest arises, and it is possible that James may not get justice and fairness if the parents do not allow his brother to donate a matching kidney.

Part 2: Evaluation

Answer each of the following questions about how principlism would be applied:

1. In 200-250 words, answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, which of the four principles is most pressing in this case? Explain why. (45 points)

The Christian worldview considers all the four principles of biomedical ethics in different situations to be significant (Meilaender, 2015). In this scenario, it is evident that beneficence is the most critical principle based on the decisions that the parents take and even the church members. Beneficence implores on health practitioners to act with the best intentions while providing care to their patients (Tegin & Zhu, 2015). Imperatively, during the two visits to the hospital, the physician acts and advises the parents in the best interest of their son. First, he tells them that James requires dialysis, and on the second occasion, after they reported back, he is categorical that the minor needs a kidney transplant. On their part, the parents act in the best interest or intension for their son. They want their son to be healed and get well. An evaluation of their actions based on a Christian worldview shows that they have the interest of the son even though medical indications show a worse situation without immediate action. They want their son to be healed for his best interest and willing to donate their kidneys. The church where they worship through its members also shows beneficence as they come forward to donate kidney only that all the donors’ organs do not match James’ kidney except his brother. The parents are worried about the potential harm due to the possible health outcomes of James’ brother donating his kidney. They opt to engage in sincere prayers and believe that divine intervention is better than treatment.

 

2. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian rank the priority of the four principles? Explain why. (45 points)

The reactions from James’ parents demonstrate that a Christian perspective would uniquely rank the four principles to reflect the beliefs blessed by the church. The first principle would be beneficence, where all actions should be focused on ensuring that it is for the best interest of the believer. Secondly, nonmaleficence would be the next principle where they believe that harm should never occur to a believer based on the actions by physicians or the need to pray and seek divine intervention. The next will be justice and fairness, while autonomy would rank the fourth most important. Christians must show love, live in faith, and believe in a miracle-working of God (Orr, 2015). The actions by James’ parents, as well as his church, show these values and their importance. It is the love that the parents have for their two sons that they want the best for them. James’ condition perturbs them so much, and they resort to their faith and prayers as the most effective way of dealing with the situation. Christian worldview implores parents to act in the best interest of their children as a sign of love and protect their autonomy (Meilaender, 2015). The parents must consider the principle of nonmaleficence to prevent any potential harm. Justice and fairness are critical to Christians and should be demonstrated through their actions.

References:

Bibler, T. M., Shinall, M. J., & Stahl, D. (2018). Responding to Those Who Hope for a Miracle:

Practices for Clinical Bioethicists. The American Journal of Bioethics: AJOB, Vol.18, No.5, pp 40- 51. doi:10.1080/15265161.2018.1431702

Ediger, M. J. (2015). “Teaching Clinical Ethics Using the Four Topic Method,” International

            Journal of Athletic Therapy & Training, Vol.20, No.6, pp.10-13.

Meilaender, G. (2015). Bioethics: A Primer for Christians (4rd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI:

Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Orr, R. D. (2015).  Incorporating spirituality into patient care. AMA Journal of Ethics.

Retrieved from https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/incorporating-spirituality-patient-care/2015-05

Tegin, M., & Zhu, C. (2015). Beneficence and nonmaleficence in treating neonatal hypoxic-

ischemic brain injury. Developmental Neuroscience, 37 (4-5), 305-310.