Patient Autonomy
Nurses are bound by the ethics of care to provide the best clinical experiences for the patient. However, in the course of service delivery, some situations pose an ethical dilemma for the caregiving team. The patient has rights and wishes which must be respected, but the wishes may contradict lifesaving procedures. The paper analyses ethical malpractice as decided after a lawsuit.
A recent court dispute putting the caregiving team, and the patient was settled in favor of the patient. The patient had developed a gangrenous foot, which the care team thought it best to amputate to avoid further damage to the leg and also save the life of the patient. However, the patient refused the procedures saying they would rat die than live less of a person. The team, however, acting on what they thought was the best interest of the patient, amputated the patient against his will (Lepping, Palmstierna & Raveesh, 2016). On discovering what happened, the patients sued, and the case was settled in their favor. Such is the dilemma as the care unit acted in their best interest to deal with the issues. The priority for the care unit is to save lives, and that is what was done. However, the wishes of the patient were disregarded, making a difficult ethical dilemma.
The ethical principle of autonomy lies in the resolution of the moral problem. The principle provides for the patient to refuse treatment even when the treatment is deemed to be lifesaving. However, the patient has to be considered competent and not act on their whims. There is a very thin line between competency and the mere wishes of the patient (Thorsteinsdottir, Swet & Albright, 2015). However, to avoid a lawsuit and other healthcare complains, the care unit must respect the wishes of the patients since if the treatment goes against their wishes and it least to a court case, they are liable for malpractice. The principle of autonomy, therefore, provides the guideline for the patients as well as the care unit. The care unit first proposes the procedure taking care to provide all the benefits of the procedure. Afterward, the patient can give their wishes on the procedure so that their preferences are not violated. The care unit has the responsibility to sell the benefits of the procedure, but they do not have to force the patient on the procedure when the patient is adamant.
The ethical guideline of employing consultation between the patient and there care unit is efficient in solving future disputes. The ethical principle of autonomy gives the patient the power to make their personal decision on the treatment that they would like to receive. At the same time, the care unit is always bound to give the best and do no harm to the patients. From this perspective, it is the only consultation that can help to arrive at a conclusion that would benefit both the care unit as well as the patient (Blackburn et al., 2018). Without consultation, the ethical considerations are difficult to resolve with both parties satisfied. Consensus, therefore, must involve both the patient and the care unit so that future lawsuits are avoided. While it can be challenging to arrive at consensus especially when dealing with difficult patients, the care units make sure that there wishes even if trivial are respected so that there is no conflict between the patent and the care unit. Such a guideline, therefore, I build to bring benefits to patient care.
In conclusion, ethical consideration in caregiving must be consultative so that there is no dispute between the patient and the caregiving unit. Through the principle of autonomy, the patient has the right to refuse treatment or give their opinion on the care they receive. To avoid lawsuits where the patient autonomy is violated, there needs to be consultation decision making so that he is no legal or ethical implications on the care unit.