Week 7 Ethical Dilemma Paper
Week 7 Ethical Dilemma Paper
As with many industries today, the healthcare industry is fraught with ethically dilemmas one can be involved with on an almost ongoing, daily basis. Since there are so many different arms and hands in so many different cookie jars, it’s easy to get lost in all the ethical dilemmas that could amass before your very eyes. On the professional side of the equation you may run into the dilemma of having a child from humble beginnings, without the means to pay, become struck down with a disease undocumented and unlike anything that is currently on the books. Do you treat the child pro-bono ...view middle of the document...
My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.” This, to me, shows there is a certain amount of ethical accountability to go beyond the walls of “diagnose, treat, prevent.”
A pediatric doctor is presented a case involving a five year old boy who is chronically ill, tired and is developing skin lesions. The nurse informs the doctor that the family has no health insurance and does not qualify for governmental assistance. She says all the preliminary testing shows no conclusive diagnosis nor does anything on the books today. The family is well aware of their financial plight but refuses to quit and has held fundraisers in their community to help pay for the medical bills. Unfortunately what they have been able to drum up is only a fraction of the total costs. The pediatrician is now forced with an ethical decision to make: Do I treat the child on my own dime and run the risk of something going awry then have to deal with a malpractice lawsuit or do I let the child go untreated and possibly have his death on my conscience? On the basis of deontological ethics I think it is of great importance that the doctor treats the child pro-bono as a show of good faith to the child, the family members and those in the community and to show the doctor as a man of ethical fiber. This whole scenario actually happened about eight years back in a neighboring town, a lot of residents from towns all over helped pitch in any money they could.
I think it’s hard to show exactly how doctors are trying to resolve this sort of conflict as it comes down to a matter of: What’s more important – Your wallet or a life? I know I’ve heard of professionals getting together to form coalitions that make their goals to help those in need and also to get money in storage to help individuals in this such case, but as a whole there really isn’t much of a movement to make this widespread. As far as industry wide standards, I know a doctor licensed in one state can’t cross state lines to perform free work on a patient, I think this alone shows there is more to resolve than what it on the surface. "The greatest impediment that we face in giving this type of care -- free care -- is that for some extraordinary reason that I've never been able to understand, a doctor, dentist or nurse licensed and trained in one state is not allowed to take that license and cross into other states to provide free care for needy and underserved Americans," Stan Brock said.
If we are to behave unethically, and by that I mean the deontological sense to not follow our duties, and let the child go untreated I think this could be a slippery slope into a corporate culture where greed of the self is worth more than the life of another. By allowing the child to go untreated we could see a family go into turmoil as a mother and father lose their son, a sister loses her brother and so on. This could have far reaching affects which could lead to more serious issues inside...