Case study on You Will Do What You Are Told

Case study on You Will Do What You Are Told

The present paper is a study of a case titled “You Will Do What You Are Told.” The case entails a medical assistant who gets demanded by his employer, Dr. Bully, to fill a form for the experimental therapy of a female patient who has cancer. It puts the assistant in a tight spot as the law of the state does not advocate such an activity.

Part I

In the case study, a medical assistant gets delegated a controversial assignment. The assistant gets forced to fill a form that entails the experimental study of a novel drug; ZX12, to a young female patient who has cancer. The drug is yet to be approved by the FDA, and her health condition is improving. In the marketing of the product, the manufacturers claim that the drug is a post-treatment medication. Also, it quickly reinstates the energy of the patient and averts the reoccurrence of cancer. Two significant issues get revealed in the case. Foremost, this clinical trial is dependent to the law of the state. Others allow it, whereas, in other states, it is prohibited. Therefore, the issue is that medical assistants need to be aware of the governing laws in the state they work as they can bring legal or ethical problems. Secondly, Dr. Bully threatens the medical assistant that, failure in the filling of the form, will make him lose the management position he has been desiring.

Part II

“Right to Try Laws” are policies created in a state or federal setting, and their motive is to allow patients who are terminally ill to access experimental drugs. For a patient to be eligible, the condition needs to be life-threatening, they must have exhausted all sanctioned treatment possibilities and provided written consent, either by them or their authorized representatives. On the other hand, a drug that has been examined in an entire Phase 1 clinical trial, not approved by FDA (Food and Drugs Act), has been filed with the FDA as an effective investigational novel medicine and not in the clinical hold is authorized. The patient’s health was improving as the signs and symptoms of the dreadful disease had lessened. Thus, the patient will not fall under the protection of the “Right to Try Laws.”

Part III

In a state that has not implemented the “Right to Try Laws,” the undertakings of Dr. Bully, according to me, would be precedent, if the patient’s condition becomes critical. The drug is viable as it is meant for post-cancer individuals and has attained the standards of being used in experimental therapy. The medical assistant gives an in-depth explanation to the patient concerning the drug. Nonetheless, she is not persuaded and declares she would like to try the novel drug. The precedence of the actions is due to that the patient gives her consent, and the drug is eligible.

Part IV

The approach Dr. Bully uses- “the management job that you desire will not be available unless the paperwork is completed and on his desk in the next 30 minutes,” is unacceptable. As a director, he is not supposed to hold a position, especially that of the manager, to a medical assistant that has proved himself and approaching completion of his degree in healthcare management. The irrational behaviors by the director pose future concerns to the medical assistant, even if he secures the manager’s position. The concerns include the high risks of getting dismissed if he does not support any decision of Dr. Bully.

Part V

The best option for solving the medical assistant’s dilemma is for him to countercheck whether the immediate state has embraced the “Right to Try Laws.” If the state has adopted such a law, it will be okay for him to fill out the form. However, if the law is not implemented, it is best if he does not fill the form. It is because the experiment will be illegal and unethical, which is contrary to the virtues of healthcare providers. He should, therefore, approach Dr. Bully and describe his stance. During the dialogue, he ought to also mention the reason as to why he is not willing to fill the paperwork. Though his chances of losing the manager’s spot will be high.

Part VI

If a state has implemented the “”Rights to Try Laws,” conducting a standard experiment of the non-approved drug and form filling will have no legal implications to a medical assistant. Nevertheless, if the state has no provisions of the law, filling out of the form will be illegal and viewed as negligence on the part of the assistant. One of the numerous roles of a medical assistant is to make sure there is adherence to the laws, and the resulting negligence is because healthcare providers in the same setting to that of the medical assistant are expected to know it is unethical.

Part VII

The most appropriate legal action a medical assistant can take is reporting the case to the necessary authority once he has all the solid facts. Agencies dealing with such cases include the Office of Investigations and Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team. Although the Whistleblower law will protect him, he is at risk of retaliation.

Part VIII

Bestowing to me, the medical assistant handles the issue correctly by first bringing attention to his employer. If I were unaware of the current state of the region, in regards to the “Right to Try Law”, I would have done research before offering the patient my opinion.

Therefore, policy education in the healthcare setting is essential to mitigate legal drawbacks. It can get achieved by initiating education as early as possible, for instance, during the interview. There should be no end to this initiative due to that laws are enacted frequently and should be done during every agenda of the facility.