Applying the Four Principles: Case StudyPart 1: Chart (60 points)
Based on the “Healing and Autonomy” case study, fill out all the relevant boxes below. Provide the information by means of bullet points or a well-structured paragraph in the box. Gather as much data as possible.
Medical Indications
Beneficence and Nonmaleficence
Patient Preferences
Autonomy
Faster dialysis will end up relieving or reducing high blood pressure as well as fluid buildup of James. James is placed on dialysis due to deteriorating condition. Also he needs the kidney transplant in a year. Samuel, James’s twin brother is the only one regarded as an ideal tissue donor. While conducting the kidney transplant would save the life of James, it will threaten the life of Samuel due to major surgery and losing one kidney (Ghaderi et al. 2018).
The care provider has abided by the parent’s autonomy through permitting them to exercise their spiritual beliefs. The care provider has also agreed to the patient’s faith the spiritual beliefs will restore the health of the patient. Mike the father of the twin thinks that miracle will heal his son as he struggle with the probability of going ahead with surgery. More so, little opinion is aired by Joanne the mother of the twins and this raises eyebrows as why
Quality of Life
Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy
Contextual Features
Justice and Fairness
Medical treatment will help in restoring the kidney functionality of James as well as save his life, however he will experience some discomfort due to the temporary dialysis. Medical treatment should bring James’s renal function to normalcy however; he has not received such treatment as results of autonomy and parent’s decision on depend on faith. This led to continues deterioration of the health condition of the patient. The deteriorating condition will only demand kidney transplant. James is now going to depend on dialysis is which lower the quality of life, because the procedure has to be conducted three times in a week and it is physically draining (Ghaderi et al. 2018). With time he will lose life or undergo kidney transplant.
Having a kidney from Samuel will improve James’s quality of life. Samuel on the other hand will temporary decline in functionality and if he lose the one kidney, he will also require a transplant (Shaha et al. 2018).
If Samuel gives his brother a kidney he will save life of his brother ad not lose hm. He will in turn improve his life .Nomalificience principle is highlighted Mike struggle with the decision of losing one son and putting the other can on a major surgery leading to increased risk of surviving on one kidney (Gracindo et al. 2018).
Mike, the father of the twins wonders and is in dilemma whether it is just or fair to put Samuel through the great ordeal of surgery and go through the risk of having only one kidney. However, given the close relationship between James and Samuel, it would be proper if .