Decision Making in Professional Practice - Case Study Example

Report Name Institution Summary The paper explores Mr. Rudi Segal’s case in which he is under medical are in St. Jude’s hospital after being diagnosed with pneumonia. At first, he is under the close watch of Angela, who claims to be his partner despite being too young for his age. Angela a directive for the summoning of a pastoral team to pray for Segal. She also suggests the application of advanced medical procedures after the situation worsened. Conversely, Rachel, Segal’s daughter, arrives and claims that Angela has no right to make decisions on behalf of her father. She makes her own suggestions. Therefore, an ethical dilemma emanates. In this case, the identification of ethical issues in the scenario and the enactment of relevant measures is imperative. The inclusion model for decision making formulated by Chenoweth and McAuliffe (2015) provides a suitable approach to the scenario. Mr. Rudi Segal’s case study presents an ethical dilemma that poses disparity over the best decision to make while ensuring adherence to ethical principles that guide professional practice in healthcare. In this case, the ultimate decision should account for the interest of both parties; Angela, who is Segal’s partner and Rachel, his daughter. The situation raises some reflective and cultural issues, for example, concerning religion and decision-making. Inclusion is an imperative aspect to consider in this case, to ensure that none of the parties is dissatisfied. Applying the four essential strategies in conjunction with the dimensions as depicted by Chenoweth and McAuliffe (2015) constitutes a credible approach to the impending situation. The strategies are attributable to the inclusive model that guides ethical decision making; they are interlinked to ensure consistency in the process of transitioning from one step to the next. The essential dimensions include accountability, cultural reflection, critical consideration, and consultation. The dimensions reveal core steps relevant for the decision-making process. The steps involve finding out information, assessing alternative actions, implementing the action and the evaluation of outcomes. In this context accountability denotes the capacity to make decisions that depict a clear articulation and a basis for justification. It encompasses personal, organizational, professional, cultural, legal and social contexts (Hugman, 2012). Each of the steps should facilitate the adoption of a justifiable decision regarding Segal’s case. Critical reflection accounts the ability to implement decisions that allow scrutiny by other related parties, provide clarification of practice and fosters the adoption of better approaches to future practice. In this case, both Angela and Rachel should be able to scrutinize the decision-making process. Cultural sensitivity denotes the capacity to adopt decisions that are culturally correct or suitable; this aspect accounts for the disparate value positions held by the conflicting parties. The final decisions should not compromise the cultural affiliations of the individual in question, in this case, Segal. The final dimension is consultation. It depicts the ability to mobilize resources wisely and engage relevant parties in essential discussions that may assist in constructing accountability, personal reflection, and cultural sensitivity. For inclusion to prevail, all the dimensions should involve a considerable level of consultation. Ethical Issues in the Scenario For effective decision making, it is imperative to identify the pertinent ethical issues in Segal’s scenario. The first ethical issue emerges when Angela requests for a pastoral care team to come pray for Sega; this is a personal request based on her own beliefs in miracles. It is not determinable if Mr. Segal or other family members ascribe to the same belief. Therefore, the ethical question is whether it would be right to follow Angela’s directions or to avoid interfering with the personal beliefs because of the limited understanding of the same with regard to the limited information about Segal. In this case, granting Angela’s request may be contradictory to Segal’s beliefs especially because he cannot speak for himself. It is not clear whether Angela’s preference is in line with what Segal would want if he were in a position to make a decision. Another ethical issue arises with the arrival of Rachel, Segal’s daughter. Upon her arrival, she makes various claims that she cannot substantiate. An argument erupts between her and Angela as a result of various differences. For instance, Rachel refers to Angela’s religious artifacts as paraphernalia. She asserts that her father is Jewish and that any prayer should adhere to the provisions of that religion and not Angela’s ideas. Also, after Segal’s health deteriorated the two ladies disagree over the appropriate measures necessary to remedy the situation. Angela suggests the initiation of life-saving measures including the uses of antibiotics. Conversely, Rachel opposes this suggestion by asserting that medical heroics would not help in the eminent situation. She says that her father was also against such medical procedures after her uncles’ death but provides no evidence to back her assertions. Steps for Decision-making Defining the Ethical Dilemma and Collecting Information The first step, in this case, will be defining the ethical dilemma. The definition would involve consultations and other methods of finding out information. Imperative distinctions are mandatory in this case especially because of the divergent demands that emanate from the ethical dilemma. In this situation, there is need to help two individuals in the process of achieving a unanimous decision or agreement. The process of defining the dilemma will also involve the consideration of competing for ethical principles; this involves the comparison of one ethical principle to another to identify the one that best applies to the impending situation (McAuliffe & Chenoweth, 2015). Also, as practitioner, it is vital to consider obligations, duties and responsibility to ensure utmost accountability for actions taken. The definition determines whether or not the situation poses an ethical dilemma. In this case study, the fact that Angela and Rachel cannot agree on anything regarding Segal’s health poses disparity that demands ethical intervention by the relevant practitioners. Therefore, an ethical dilemma is eminent. Being clear about the existence of the ethical dilemma constitutes the basis for appropriate actions. It would not be possible to take appropriate actions before assessing the situation and defining the pertinent disparities. Defining this aspect is not difficult especially in this case that involves two individuals with divergent views on a critical issue. It may be necessary to consult other professionals in the hospital such as supervisors. The consultation gives a more comprehensive depiction of the problem by defining it in various ways (Bullis, 2013). Having a wide range of information sources enhances the viability of the final definition of the problem for the adoption of an appropriate action. An ethically conflicted situation such as Segal’s case demands support from other practitioners to constitute a viable denotation of most of the emanating issues. Additionally, this stage also accounts for the determination of whether you are the right person to assist in decision making in the impending case. Some cases may require person belonging to higher authority to make the decision. Therefore, conducting a responsibility check to determine your suitability or capacity to make decisions or preside over the circumstances. The knowledge of your position in the case gives you a starting point regarding the appropriate action to take. In Segal’s case, I am partly responsible for the decision making but in consultation with Maggie Smith, a senior social worker in the hospital. Assessing Alternative Approaches After the definition of the ethical pertinent ethical issues, feasible options towards the formulation of a solution will be available. In this case, it is imperative to assess and weigh the appropriateness of each of the available options. It is essential to involve all the key players in determining the best approach. In this case, other the involvement of other practitioners is necessary. Rachel and Angela should also participate in the assessment of the alternative approaches especially because they constitute the conflicting parties. The clarification of the alternatives will reveal the relevance of each approach to the problem. Thinking about the implications of each decision is an appropriate way of assessing different approaches (McAuliffe & Chenoweth, 2015). For instance, before intervening in Segal’s case, it is necessary to ensure that the intervention does not impact negatively on the interest parties, that is, Angela and Rachel. The final approach should depict a significant level of inclusion to avoid dissatisfaction. At this stage, reflective practice is appropriate; this involves the definition of the motives and effects of potential solutions to the issue. Making hasty decisions in such a complex case would result in more disparity rather than providing a feasible and acceptable solution to both Angela and Rachel. For instance, the two ladies should support their claims with relevant evidence to depict the appropriateness of their assertions. Also, upon deciding on a course of action, recording and documentation of the same are necessary to constitute evidence for reference, justification, and accountability. In sum, this step involves the assessment of available options, denoting the basis of the decision, consultation, evaluating the impact of each option and the documentation of the final decision. Implementing Action As denoted in the assessment of the available approaches, the relevant action should be the most relevant amongst the list of options. The action should result in desirable effects as opposed to posing more problems. For instance, the action should consider both parties and suggest a solution that is relevant, justifiable, legal and ethical. An action with these attributes is likely to be acceptable to both parties. Action implementation should consider the harm that may emanate after the completion of the process. In this case, adopting medical procedures in Segal’s case would be adhering to Angela’s suggestion while discrediting this method would be in accordance with Rachel’s assertion. The effects of both options and the extent to which they might cause more problems will guide the enactment of relevant action. Critical Analysis and Evaluation The final step deploys reflective analysis and evaluation of the situation after the implementation of the adopted course of action. The analysis encompasses the decision or action taken and the relevance of the same in improving practice. In this case, an individual considers the lessons learned, legal obligations, organizational policies, and cultural issues among others. All these factors depict some aspects of actions or decisions that constitute an ethical approach to a critical decision. Additionally, the analysis of the information obtained from other sources including practitioners is necessary to determine the relevance and value of the advice received regarding the solved problem. The impact of the action on oneself and others is also imperative in the analysis. For instance, this requires the assessment of how each of the involved parties reacts to the final course of action. The appropriateness of the decision is dependent on its impact on the concerned individuals. Ethical dilemma invokes various physiological, emotional and behavioral characteristics (McAuliffe & Chenoweth, 2015). The decision adopted in Segal’s case is likely to impact differently on both Angela and Rachel; their behavior and attitude towards each other. Relevant action is likely to channel them into a agreement that will eliminate the likelihood of further conflicts and disagreements between the two. In sum, analysis involves issues pertaining to the impact of the action on the decision maker, the conflicting parties, and general practice. Recommendations Regarding the case study on Mr. Segal’s case, this paper proposes the following recommendations: It is essential first to define the ethical dilemma posed by the situation between Angela and Rachel. In this case, both parties get a chance to air their views and give evidence if necessary. After both of them get a chance to state their case, the relevant practitioners then decide whether an ethical dilemma exists or not (Sue et al., 2016). In this case, it exits because the two ladies cannot agree on anything regarding Segal’s health; they denote disparate ideological and religious affiliations. Each of them believes that their idea is the most feasible in the process of fixing the situation. The assessment of alternative approaches should include the consultation of relevant sources to get views on the issue. The use of credible sources of information would make the action appropriate, justifiable and ensure adherence to accountability, professional practice ethics, and legal requirements. Additionally, both Angela and Rachel should participate in the consultation and the process of weighing the options available. It would also be valuable to incorporate other practitioners with psychological expertise to give advice to the two ladies and guide them through the adoption of a relevant decision for the well-being of Mr. Segal. Informing both ladies that their conflict and personal issues are less important in this case and that they should focus on ensuring that Mr. Segal gets the necessary care would give them a different perspective. They will view the situation from the positive dimension rather than based on their personal differences. Finally, it is essential to implement the adopted course of action after settling all the emanating concerns. The impacts of the decision are also imperative as they determine reactions from both parties and their views on the relevance of the decision (Reamer, 2013). It is vital to engage them in the implementation process to ensure that they are familiar and in agreement with the final decision. In this case, both Angela and Rachel should understand the imperativeness of medical procedures and family support in the healing process. Conflicts would not make the situation any better. After enacting the appropriate action, evaluation is necessary for the determination its impact on Segal’s health, the relationship between Angela and Rachel. Also, the contribution of the action to professional practice is vital for future decisions of the same nature. Conclusion In summation, Mr. Segal’s case demands intervention from relevant practitioners in the hospital. The fact that Rachel and Angela cannot agree on the appropriate treatment procedures that would remedy the situation constitute an ethical dilemma. The two also portray some social and cultural differences with regard to religion. Angela insists on prayers from pastoral care units while Rachel asserts that her father is Jewish and the religion should apply. The intervention should ensure inclusion of both of the conflicting parties, me as a social worker and other practitioners with relevant experience in the field. The process is sequential and begins with the definition of the ethical dilemma, assessment and scrutiny of various approaches, action implementation and evaluation of the situation after the enactment of the decision. Notably, the action should account for critical reflection, cultural consideration, accountability and consultation.   References McAuliffe, D., & Chenoweth, L. (2015). Leave no stone unturned: The inclusive model of ethical decision making. Ethics and social welfare, 2(1), 38-49. Sue, D. W., Jackson, K. F., Rasheed, M. N., & Rasheed, J. M. (2016).Multicultural Social Work Practice: A Competency-Based Approach to Diversity and Social Justice. John Wiley & Sons. Hugman, R. (2012). Culture, values and ethics in social work: Embracing diversity. Routledge. Bullis, R. K. (2013). Spirituality in social work practice. Taylor & Francis. Reamer, F. G. (2013). Social work values and ethics. Columbia University Press. Read More

Critical reflection accounts the ability to implement decisions that allow scrutiny by other related parties, provide clarification of practice and fosters the adoption of better approaches to future practice. In this case, both Angela and Rachel should be able to scrutinize the decision-making process. Cultural sensitivity denotes the capacity to adopt decisions that are culturally correct or suitable; this aspect accounts for the disparate value positions held by the conflicting parties. The final decisions should not compromise the cultural affiliations of the individual in question, in this case, Segal.

The final dimension is consultation. It depicts the ability to mobilize resources wisely and engage relevant parties in essential discussions that may assist in constructing accountability, personal reflection, and cultural sensitivity. For inclusion to prevail, all the dimensions should involve a considerable level of consultation. Ethical Issues in the Scenario For effective decision making, it is imperative to identify the pertinent ethical issues in Segal’s scenario. The first ethical issue emerges when Angela requests for a pastoral care team to come pray for Sega; this is a personal request based on her own beliefs in miracles.

It is not determinable if Mr. Segal or other family members ascribe to the same belief. Therefore, the ethical question is whether it would be right to follow Angela’s directions or to avoid interfering with the personal beliefs because of the limited understanding of the same with regard to the limited information about Segal. In this case, granting Angela’s request may be contradictory to Segal’s beliefs especially because he cannot speak for himself. It is not clear whether Angela’s preference is in line with what Segal would want if he were in a position to make a decision.

Another ethical issue arises with the arrival of Rachel, Segal’s daughter. Upon her arrival, she makes various claims that she cannot substantiate. An argument erupts between her and Angela as a result of various differences. For instance, Rachel refers to Angela’s religious artifacts as paraphernalia. She asserts that her father is Jewish and that any prayer should adhere to the provisions of that religion and not Angela’s ideas. Also, after Segal’s health deteriorated the two ladies disagree over the appropriate measures necessary to remedy the situation.

Angela suggests the initiation of life-saving measures including the uses of antibiotics. Conversely, Rachel opposes this suggestion by asserting that medical heroics would not help in the eminent situation. She says that her father was also against such medical procedures after her uncles’ death but provides no evidence to back her assertions. Steps for Decision-making Defining the Ethical Dilemma and Collecting Information The first step, in this case, will be defining the ethical dilemma.

The definition would involve consultations and other methods of finding out information. Imperative distinctions are mandatory in this case especially because of the divergent demands that emanate from the ethical dilemma. In this situation, there is need to help two individuals in the process of achieving a unanimous decision or agreement. The process of defining the dilemma will also involve the consideration of competing for ethical principles; this involves the comparison of one ethical principle to another to identify the one that best applies to the impending situation (McAuliffe & Chenoweth, 2015).

Also, as practitioner, it is vital to consider obligations, duties and responsibility to ensure utmost accountability for actions taken. The definition determines whether or not the situation poses an ethical dilemma. In this case study, the fact that Angela and Rachel cannot agree on anything regarding Segal’s health poses disparity that demands ethical intervention by the relevant practitioners. Therefore, an ethical dilemma is eminent. Being clear about the existence of the ethical dilemma constitutes the basis for appropriate actions.

Read More