Discharge Plan Assignment - Essay Example

Discharge Plan Discharge Plan Discharge planning is process that begins one the patient is admitted in the hospital. To the patient,the hospital environment may be frightening daunting and confusing especially when the condition is vulnerable. In Management process, care transfer is essential which the main function of the organization. It ensures resources are utilized effectively. In order to provide timely transfer, clinicians and other staff members do planning process is mandatory. The main ideas that all these process rest in the discharge or transfers is the need for identification of discharge or transfer, pre-admission planning, effective communication between the clinician and Care giver and good management plan to ensure that care are given continually. This paper is an outline of a manager who plans the transfer process of a patient suffering from ESRD on dialysis. The patient prefer going back home while the third parties are in disagreement of the idea. As the case manager the procedure below will be the guideline followed to deal with the matter in question. On the onset of admission, the transfer needs would be the autonomous decision of the patient and the immediate environment of the patient. In this case the patient’s ability to make rational decision is considered important. In case of mental disability, the patient is farther diagnosed for any mental illness. The extent to which the care givers are committed to give the care services needed by the patient. These two factors are put into consideration and make the basis upon which decision of transfer will be made on. When the patient makes rational decision and the environment is conducive, he or she will be transferred. In case otherwise, other options will be explore such as negotiating with immediate care takers. The discharge level care for the patient is transferred from the staff to the immediate family members at home. These are third party carers who provide the service at home. They can either accept the duty or disagree. In case of disagreement negotiations are necessary to strike a deal with the family members. The patient is destined to home not any other place, this is because the patient wanted to be transferred back home not any other place even though the family members were in disagreement. The basis of the decision is guided by the principle of autonomy of the client which must be considered in relation to other option. The other principles are independency of the patient, the protection of the patient’s well being and the integration of professional team work. These principles helped in the arrival of the decision to transfer the patient to environment which favors their decision (Mattison, 2000). The third party level care was appropriate because it was in harmony with patient’s autonomous decision of going home though the family members were not in agreement. The persons that were involved were the nurses themselves, the family member and the social workers. The nurses would participate in organization of transport to the actual destiny. The family members would provide required services at home while on the other hand the social worker will provide social services outside the hospital necessary for the wellbeing of the patient. The transportation of the client to the expected destiny was incurred by the hospital. The hospital contributed the van that was used by the family members contributed the moral support to the patient. The destiny of the patient would be conducive enough to provide the atmosphere to recover. Adequate food is needed and maximum support is required from the new members will take care of the patient at home. The follow up activities were made through physical visitations and making phone calls. The physical visitation was done twice a week. The phone calls were made twice daily in the morning and in the evening to determine the condition of the patient. This was to confirm if the patient is improving or not. In case the transportation would be lacking, the management would plead and strike a deal with family members to incur the expenses of transportation at the will of the patient. Making follow up activities will be deemed necessary if the condition of the patient is deteriorating. The frequency would be reduced once the normal conditions are achieved in the patient. It also depends on the attitude and the perception of the immediate carer of the patients. In some case it might not be necessary if the procedure is followed. The cognitive capacity of the patient was taken into consideration. His or her decision was deemed important and the final decision was made after thorough consultation in each stage before the discharge. Even thought the health team agreed with the discharge, the family, member disagreed with their decision. It now called for negotiations and dialogue to understand the two conflicting parties. The negation involves explaining to the family members the need for discharge to home than others. This was due to the need of the patient to make the preferred environment more conducive than the hospital (Mattison, 2000). The rational decision of the patient is considered more important than the family members who are also consulted and informed about the situation that is yet to happen. If the family members are unwilling to accept the patient home other alternative like looking for self apartment would work better in order to improve the conditions of the patient. Sometime, a series of discharge may fail due to complications in the process. The patient needs to stay in the hospital for quite a long time as the transfer plan get organized for the patient to move to an environment that will provide necessary conditions for wellbeing. In resolving the issues using the Mattison’s hierarchical ethical decision model, the social worker or the practitioner is to view the current decision linked to the other ethical consideration made in the past cases. In this model it is the person – in –situation is considered and in this case the patient. The systematic approach for resolving the conflict and the use of directory judgment is applicable. There are two groups of ethical theories that are relevant in this issues to help make decision. The first one considers that the attention to weigh the consequence of the action to be taken. The transfer of patient to a new environment has consequences. The surrounding family members have different view towards them. The other part theory argues that the moral rules should be used as the guiding principles in making the decision. It defines the extent of rightness or wrongness of the action. The moral values and consequences are considered before the action is taken. The patient conditions are analyzed the best way to solve the conflict that exists between the patient and the family members are solved. This model presents the hierarchy that should be followed when dealing with the patient situation. The practitioner should begin by exploring the case of the patient to gather detailed information of the clients (Mattison, 2000). The holistic analysis in this case involved the family members to understand the patient decision of going home is important. The second consideration is to distinguish the practice aspect and ethical consideration. The practitioner should not confuse the practice and the ethical consideration dealing with the case of the patient. The tensions values are identified. The family members don’t want the discharge while the patient in the opinion considers it necessary. In dealing with this case appropriate the standard ethical consideration are taken into action autonomy of the client and the protection of the wellbeing. In a deep consideration of the situation the best course of action is arrived at. The patient is to be taken home, considering the costs and the benefits .The analyses are done then solution is arrived at. In resolving the conflict the value preferences are prioritized to understand the case of the patient. References Mattison, M. (2000). ‘Ethical Decision Making: The Person in the Process.’ Social Work, 45(3), 201-212. Read More