Code of Ethics in Healthcare - Essay Example

of Ethics in Healthcare: Autonomy of Ethics in Healthcare: Autonomy Autonomy of the patients in accepting or rejecting a particular treatment is accepted as a code of ethics in healthcare. For example Jews will never accept the blood of others even if they are in critical conditions. Accepting blood from others is against their religious beliefs. Physician assisted suicide or mercy killing is another topic in which healthcare professionals often forced to respect the autonomy of the patients. The major duty of the healthcare professionals is to save the life of the patients; however, today doctors forced to assist the patients in finishing their lives in some particular situations. Doctors quiet often come across with difficult situations in which they were confused of whether to inform the patient about his/her critical conditions or not. Most of the patients may develop more stress and their condition may become too bad if they came to know that their diseases are incurable and their remaining time in the earth is limited. This often prevents the doctors from informing them about their exact conditions. But as per medical ethics a patient has every right to know about his medical condition even if it is worst or good. Moreover he/she has the right to know more about his health conditions and to accept or reject treatments. In short, autonomy of the patients in accepting or rejecting treatments often been raises many ethical questions. This paper briefly analyses the feasibility of enforcing autonomy of patients in accepting or rejecting treatments in healthcare sector. Autonomy of patients and ethical theories As per the Utilitarian theory of ethics, the moral validity of an action is determined by the outcome of the action. But as per Kantian ethical theory the purpose of morality is not to make others happy, but to do the right thing just for the sake of doing (Maccarelli, 2006). Utilitarian always assess an activity based on the utility of it. Suppose a patient is experiencing severe pain and the doctors have no hope in saving his life. Under such circumstances the patient may demand mercy killing. If the doctor accepts the patient’s demand, the patient will be benefitted or the utility of mercy killing will be positive for the patient. However, medical ethics ask the healthcare professionals to save the life of the patients rather than taking it. In other words, the doctor will be put into a dilemma when the patient demands mercy killing. But as per medical ethics the autonomy of the patient should be respected. The patient has every right to know about his/her medical condition and the doctor is liable to explain him/her about the present condition and the future prospects. Legally or morally, the doctor don’ have the right to keep the health conditions of the patient as a secret. Keeping the patient optimistic about the recovery when there is no chance is one way of cheating the patient. The patient has trusted the doctor and hence it is morally wrong to give him wrong information about his/her health condition. In short, according to utilitarian ethics, the autonomy of the patient should be given prominence over the professional ethics of the doctor. According to the principles of utilitarianism, cultural, intellectual and spiritual pleasures are of greater value than mere physical pleasure. When we give autonomy to the patients in determining their future, the patients can prepare themselves for accepting the death just like Britain’s famous reality show celebrity Joe Goody did. Joe Goody has celebrated even her death and she has earned lot of money for her kids by selling the outright claim for telecasting her last moments. In short, respecting the autonomy of the patients in taking decisions about their future will bring material benefits also to the patients and the relatives. Kantian ethics also argues in favour of the autonomy of patients. Kant argued that we usually label a parson’s activity as good or evil based on our traditional beliefs and customs rather than bothering too much about how that activity is significant to that person. For example, it is quite possible that the relatives of a patient in critical condition may oppose the demand of the patient for mercy killing citing reasons related to religious beliefs. For example, religions believe that the life is the creation of God and only the God has the right to take it back. Since no science or technology has succeeded in developing artificial life yet, it is illogical to destroy a life. Moreover, religions taught the people that a person will never get salvation or eternal life once he/she commits suicide or deliberately finish his/her life with the help of others. All these traditions and beliefs will force the relatives of the patient to argue against mercy killing. However, Kant argued that such perceptions and beliefs are immoral and the only a person has the right to take decisions about his future based on his consciousness. Kant argued that family, society and the religion influence us very much in the formulation of our attitudes, thoughts, views etc and our moral education is mostly influenced by the norms prescribed by the family, society and the religion. Immanuel Kant challenges such beliefs and argued that the character and actions of any given individual are good only if he has an independent conception of moral goodness. “Kant points out that a good will must be good in itself and not in virtue of its relationship to other things” (Johnson, 2008). In other words, while deciding about mercy killing, the benefit of the mercy killing to the patient should be analyzed in the first place rather than forecasting the future implications. In short, autonomy of the patient in taking decisions is supported by Kant. In some cases, it is difficult to respect the autonomy of the patients. For example, it is impossible for the doctor to respect or accept the demands of the psychologically disordered patients. The term autonomy is significant to a patient only when he/she is aboe to take sound decisions. In other words, the healthcare professionals should ensure that the patient has enough physical and mental health to think properly and to take sound decisions before respecting the autonomy of the patients. For example, patients with depression often hate their life. Such patients may demand mercy killing. It is illogical for the doctor to consider the opinions of such patients on ethical grounds related to autonomy of the patients. To conclude, autonomy of the patients should be respected by the healthcare professionals under normal conditions. However, the doctor or the healthcare professionals should ensure that the patient has enough physical and mental health to take sound decisions before respecting the autonomy of the patients. References 1. Johnson, R. (2008) Kants Moral Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/ 2. Maccarelli, S. (2006). The Ethical Theory of Kantianism.. Retrieved from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/20668/the_ethical_theory_of_kantianism.html?cat=9 Read More