The Nurse Who Thought the ANA Code was Wrong: An Analysis

The Nurse Who Thought the ANA Code was Wrong: An Analysis

Introduction

Mrs. Levy is faced with two conflicting situations that require moral considerations to resolve. The code of ethics for nurses (ANA), emphasizes that a patient should remain autonomous and the nurse must respect the integrity of whatever wishes the patient has. In the stated case study, Mr. Carson’s niece is transmitting his wishes, even though his wishes were clarified and the ANA code mainly provides that a surrogate person should make the decisions. Mrs. Levi’s tradition similarly emphasizes it is a nurse’s moral obligation to preserve life even when the patient is suffering from a terminal illness, like in the case of Mr. Carson.

The nurse, in some situations, might be in a position to resolve the conflict by referring to the conscience clause that is provided for by the ANA code. According to the code, when a nurse is able to morally object a treatment, activity, intervention, or practice, because she considers it inappropriate, or where it is capable of bringing jeopardy to both the practice of the nurse, and the patient, the nurse in her justifications has a right to refuse to take part, citing moral grounds. In Mr. Carson’s case, however, has a more complex moral conflict. When a realization emerges that Mr. Carson’s life will be cut short, a request is presented to Mrs. Levy to stop his tube feeding. If Mrs. Levy withdraws from the case, another nurse would take over and stop the feeding, which would also dissatisfy Mrs. Levy and her religious beliefs that obligate her to preserve life. Mr. Carson would still pass on as a result of inadequate hydration and nutrition.

The same problem is likely to manifest itself if Mr. Carson or his niece decide not to try and resuscitate him, and record it in the medical books. Such a situation might make it awkward for Mrs. Levy to recuse herself from the case. A situation might occur where she is the only nurse in her unit on shift. If she decides not to resuscitate if he instructed during her shift, she will violate her duty according to her religion.

Mrs. Levy’s dilemma raises an underlying issue of what is the relative status of different religious interpretations and various codes that help the nurse come up with her ethical stands. Mrs. Levy seems to be considering two different types of authority. One regards a particular sphere of a person’s life; in this case, nursing, while the other regards what is considered to be correct in terms of ethics for the entire life of an individual and is acceptable to specific religious traditions. If an individual is convinced that professional groups invented their members’ morality, or that the group’s wisdom is the right way of determining what is right and wrong for its members, the claims will be acceptable.

The codes of ethics that guide professional associations bind the members of those associations but only if the association can censure violation of the code by the members. Members who violate code will presumably be expelled from the association. The question for Mrs. Levy is whether she should consider that her professional association is specially authorized to determine what is ethical for her as a nurse. Some health practitioners, in the past, have asserted that professional groups must create moral duties for its members. Others have contradicted the opinion by stating that a group cannot invent ethics, and ethical requirements need to be confined beyond mere convention.

The same question is posed to the ethics of the respective professions. Can members of the profession take part in determining the duties of a professional? If they can, Mrs. Levy should, therefore, consider the professional associations’ pronouncements, as well as others who are interested in knowing their professional obligations. If they don’t, Mrs. Levy can listen to what they say but not use them as an authority. She should see them as simple opinions of a particular group concerning the special duties of the group, hence doing what she considers ethical.

Conclusion

            Healthcare practitioners have unique duties to their patients that will not be applicable in other fields. One of the responsibilities is showing an unparalleled dedication to their patients. Similar to the way professionals such as military and police officers have their respective ethical duties, so do health practitioners. The question is whether an individual has to be a member of one of the groups to understand better how their duties work. Parents and nonparents both presumably understand why the responsibility of a parent subconsciously leans towards favoring their own children’s welfare. Similarly, police recognize that they have the exclusive authority to use violence in ways that other people cannot.