Patient Consent- Patient Rights and Responsibilities – Medical Ethics Example

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

"Patient Consent- Patient Rights and Responsibilities"  is a good example of a paper on medical ethics. Informed consent can be described as an ethical concept which all the patients are supposed to understand as well as agree to the possible consequences associated with their care. It has been included in the law as well as in the day to day practice of all the medical institutions. Failure by any medical practitioner to obtain consent means they are liable for negligence or battery and this can be considered to be medical malpractice. Exceptions are made in situations that are characterized by emergencies, when the patient has been rendered incompetent legally or in the event that the patient is physically incapacitated. For a person to make informed consent,   the physician is supposed to discuss and disclose the diagnosis in case it is known as well as the nature and the purpose of the treatment procedure that the patient will undergo (Corey, Corey & Callanan, 2007).

The risks, as well as the benefits linked to the treatment that is proposed, are also supposed to be discussed and disclosed together with the alternatives in terms of the costs to be met and the extends covered by insurance.

When discussing the alternatives, the dangers and advantages are supposed to be mentioned. Risks and advantages of not going ahead with the treatment should also be addressed and disclosed to the patient. Mrs. Sparza’ s consent was not obtained in the proper way since she was not in a position to take in and retain the information that was being given to her about the procedure that she was due to undergo.

She was not able to comprehend the information when she was already being prepared for the operating room and therefore could not weigh up the information as part of the process involved in arriving at a particular decision. Mrs. Sparza's rights regarding end-of-life decision-making Mrs. Sparza has a right that is protected by the constitution that allowed her to refuse any medical treatments that she did not want or was uncomfortable with. She was also supposed to be informed of the rights she had in relation to making the decisions about medical care that include her rights to refuse or accept any medical or surgical treatment as well as the right to come up with an advance directive (Blank & Merrick, 2005). Nature of the act of injecting morphine Euthanasia is the administration of drugs that are meant to end the life of a patient at their own request while a physician-assisted suicide is the supply of drugs or a prescription drug to a patient with the knowledge that one id assisting the patient to kill him or herself (Cooney, Chappell, Callan & Connally, 2012).

There are various states that allow physicians to write prescriptions of dosages that are lethal for their patients who are terminally ill or those in comas that show no sign of getting better. The legality of the actions taken on Mrs. Sparza that included injecting her with morphine so that she could die less painfully depends on the state that she came from. This is in contrast to the arguments of some quarters that regardless of the particular circumstances, all the necessary support should be provided to make sure that life is maintained.

References

Blank, R., & Merrick, J. (2005). End-of-life decision making (1st ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT

Press.

Cooney, K., Chappell, J., Callan, R., & Connally, B. (2012). Veterinary euthanasia techniques

(1st ed.). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

Corey, G., Corey, M., & Callanan, P. (2007). Issues and ethics in the helping professions (1st

ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole/Thomson Learning.

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us