NHS4000_JuhlAllison_Assessment3-1
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Capella University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
FPX 4000
Subject
Health Science
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
6
Uploaded by ConstableHyenaMaster1193
Applying Ethical Principles
Allison Juhl
Capella University
NHS4000: Developing a Health Care Perspective
Regina Mirabella
June, 2023
Applying Ethical Principles
There are four main principles of healthcare ethics- autonomy, beneficence, justice, and
nonmaleficence. These principles are often used by medical practitioners and health care
administrators to help make decisions when complex situations arise.
Overview of the Case Study
Jenna and Chris Smith are new parents to a 5 day old baby girl named Ana. Ana was born
without complications and her parents have decided not to vaccinate her. The Smiths did some
research and pointed out the increase of autism as proof of an unexpected complication from
getting vaccines. Pediatrician Dr. Angela Kerr informs the Smiths that even though vaccines
have sparked controversy recently, the medical community strongly recommends that infants and
kids be fully vaccinated.
Dr. Kerr goes on to explain the benefits of having children vaccinated, including that they
have saved the lives of millions of children and decreased instances of infections that are
potentially fatal. Dr. Kerr informs the Smiths that the vaccines’ safety profiles are updated
regularly through databases, such as the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
The VARES vaccine safety program is accessible to the public at https:vares.hhs.gov/index. No
vaccine has been proven to cause autism or any other developmental disorders, and many studies
have been conducted to prove this. Dr. Kerr reminds the Smiths that some children are unable to
get vaccines due to weakened immune systems or are too young to receive certain vaccinations.
These children are protected because almost all other children and adults have been vaccinated,
which decreases their exposures to the illnesses. Dr. Kerr goes on to explain that most states
require vaccinations before children can be allowed to attend school. Jeanna and Chris Smith tell
Dr. Kerr that they understand what she has explained, but they still do not want Ana to be
vaccinated. Dr. Kerr is faced with an ethical dilemma of not vaccinating Ana out of her parents
wishes or to convince them to vaccinate as that is what the medical community recommends.
Analysis of Ethical Issues in the Case Study
In the case study, the main factor that led to Dr. Kerr’s ethical dilemma is Ana’s parents
refusal to vaccinate their daughter due to misinformation. When speaking to the parents, Dr. Kerr
thinks it is her duty to convince them to vaccinate. As she listens to the research Ana’s parents
did on vaccines, she does go on to inform them about the misinformation of vaccines causing
autism. However, Ana’s parents are certain they do not want to vaccinate due to the risk of
autism occurring. Considering that their decision could harm Ana and others in their community,
Dr. Kerr is concerned about Ana not receiving her vaccinations.
Using the Ethical Decision-Making Model to Analyze the Case Study
Dr. Kerr explained to the Smiths about the importance of vaccinations in a professional
manner. She then let them know about the federal government’s Vaccine Adverse Event
Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is a nationwide vaccine safety program that is accessible to
the public at https://vares.hhs.gov/index, and shows that no vaccine has been proven to cause
autism or other developmental disorders. Giving the Smiths a government website to look into
that talks about vaccines and their proven adverse reactions.
Effectiveness of Communication Approaches in the Case Study
Dr. Kerr explained to the Smiths about the importance of vaccinations in a very
professional manner. She listened as they communicated their concerns. Listening is an
important role in healthcare. By listening to the Smiths, she has learned their main reason for not
vaccinating, which is the risk of autism caused by vaccinations. By listening to them, Dr. Kerr is
able to understand the situation better. Dr. Kerr decides to present them with information they
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
would need to make an informed decision. She then let them know about the federal
government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is a nationwide
vaccine safety program that is accessible to the public at https://vares.hhs.gov/index, and shows
that no vaccine has been proven to cause autism or other developmental disorders. Dr. Kerr did
her professional duty by giving the Smiths more information about vaccine reactions, however, it
did not change their decision to not vaccinate. A key lesson for health care professionals is that
even when things have been explained with scientific proof, patients still have the right to
disagree.
Resolving the Ethical Dilemma by Applying Ethical Principles
There are four main ethical principles; autonomy, beneficence, justice, and
nonmaleficence. Autonomy refers to patients who have decision making capacity having the
right to make decisions of their care, even if practitioners disagree. Beneficence refers to the
obligation of healthcare workers to act for the benefit of the patient and prevent harm. In the
setting of healthcare ethics, when deciding if something is ethical or not, healthcare professionals
need to think about if it is legal and the patient’s rights. In healthcare there is nonmaleficence,
which refers to providing a standard of care and not doing harm intentionally.
In the ethical dilemma described in the case study, Dr. Kerr faces two of the four basic
principles of healthcare ethics. The case study, the ethical dilemma deals with conflicts of
autonomy and beneficence. Dr. Kerr preserves the autonomy of the Smiths by respecting their
wishes to not vaccinate Ana. Beneficence is also a conflict due to vaccinations preventing very
serious diseases that could cause Ana harm as well as others in the community.
Dr. Kerr could consider giving the Smiths even more data about vaccinations and try to
convince them to vaccinate. As De. Kerr is obligated to help her patients, prevent harm, and
provide a standard of care, convincing them to vaccinate could be considered by her as a
resolution to the ethical dilemma. “An autonomous decision is one that meets 3 conditions: it is
intentional, done with understanding, and done without being under the control of another. The
parents lack autonomy because of their lack of adequate understanding” (Baumrucker et al.,
2017). Although convincing them to vaccinate could result in overriding their autonomy, Dr.
Kerr may have to consider this decision to keep Ana safe and prevent harm.
Conclusion
Healthcare professionals often need to apply the four principles of health care ethics to
analyze and resolve ethical dilemmas. In the case study, Dr. Kerr has to decide between
respecting Ana’s parents’ decisions and performing her moral obligations as a healthcare
professional by helping Ana get the medical care as recommended by the medical community.
The proposed solution in this case study upholds autonomy and beneficence to resolve Dr. Kerr’s
ethical dilemma.
Refrences
Baumrucker, Steven J., et al. “Ethics Roundtable.” American Journal of Hospice and
Palliative Medicine®, vol. 34, no. 3, 2016, pp. 287–292,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049909115608812.
Capella University (2018). NHS-FP4000 Exemplar Sample Ethical Case Study. Capella
Website: Home – NHS-FPX4000 - Jun 05 2023 to Aug 27 2023 - ... (capella.edu)
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help