The Feeding Tube - Research Paper Example

The Feeding Tube Introduction Anorexia Nervosa a psychological disorder in which the patient has a distorted body image and an irrational fear of becoming overweight - so he/she deliberately attempts to lose weight by avoiding food (What is Anorexia? What is Bulimia?, 2010). In the given case study, June, a 34-year-old divorced woman diagnosed with severe anorexia, is hospitalized and her doctors tried to place a feeding tube in order to save her life. But she refused to accept a feeding tube even though her parents asked the doctor to continue the treatment with a feeding tube attached to supply food to June. On the other hand, June’s ex husband took the opposite position and supported June’s decision to reject the feeding tube. This paper analyses the above case with the help of relevant laws related to medical profession, ethics and the Patient Bill of Rights June’s case analysis with the help of relevant laws and medical ethics According to the US Patient bill of rights, a patient has the right to receive safe, considerate and respectful care, provided in a manner consistent with his/her beliefs. Moreover, a patient has the right to receive complete information about diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis from the physician (Patient bill of right, 2010). In June’s case also the above bill of right is applicable. But the problem is that the bill of right is applicable only if the patient was in a stable state both physically and mentally. But June is not in a stable state either physically or mentally to take sound decision about her future and hence it is difficult for the doctors to accept her decision to reject the feeding tube even when her life was under threat. The doctors should consider the opinion of her parents in this regard since her ex husband don’t have any legal authority over her future. He has already got divorce from her and his opinions about her future need not be considered seriously by the doctors. Under such circumstances, only June’s parents would be able to take decision about her future and there is no violation of patient’s right happens if the doctors accept the argument of her parents. The patient June is not competent enough to take decision about her future under the present condition. Her physical and mental strength were seriously diminished because of the less/no food consumed by her. It is difficult for a person to take sound decision if his body is weak. A sound mind always stays in a sound body. If the body exhausted, the mind also will be exhausted. In short, June’s decision taking abilities were considerably reduced by his lack of physical health and her mental disease or psychological disorder, Anorexia Nervosa. Primary responsibilities of June’s doctors According to medical ethics, a doctor’s primary duty is to save the life of a patient if possible. In June’s case, it is possible for the doctors to save her life by using a feeding tube to supply food and nutrients to June’s body. If the doctors failed to do so, her life could be lost and no more explanations would be acceptable from the doctor’s side under such circumstances. In some cases, doctors assist people to commit suicide if the patient is in a no hope condition and suffering severe discomfort and pain. But in June’s case, no such pathetic conditions are there and the doctors have all the possibilities to save her life. “The historical ethical traditions of medicine, strongly opposed to taking life. For instance, the Hippocratic oath states, "I will not administer poison to anyone where asked," and "Be of benefit, or at least do no harm" (Physician-Assisted Suicide, 2008). In short, medical profession has a tradition which favors saving the life rather than taking it or helping to finish it. Responsibility of the hospital administrators Hospital administrators should take every precaution to avoid future legal suits from June’s side. They should collect the written permission from her parents before allowing the doctors to proceed with the feeding of June using a feeding tube against her will. The hospital authorities should inform the law and order authority about what the present condition of June and the possible options available for the medical profession to save her life. Hospital administrators should incorporate the service of a psychologist to June in order to convince her about the necessity of a feeding tube for saving her life. Moreover, after saving her life the hospital management should seek the help of a psychiatrist also in treating her. Only the combined effort of the parents, legal authorities, hospital authorities, psychologists, psychiatrists and the physician could save the life of June and lead June towards a healthy trouble free life. Hospital’s ethical and legal obligations in this situation No hospital management would like to allow a patient to die in their premise, if the lives saving options are available. Allowing a patient to die in a hospital environment by denying him/her the necessary treatment is legally and ethically wrong. Historically, the relationship between a patient and a doctor is a divine one which has only one dimension; saving the life of the patient at any cost if possible. Drickamer et al, (2004) has pointed out that at the time when a patient rejects the treatment and requests physician-assisted suicide, the patient may be experiencing isolation, guilt, or low self-worth as a result of being a burden to others and anger or other emotions may limit the patient's acceptance of alternatives (Drickamer et al, 2004). In June’s case, she was severely affected by the psychological disorder or illusion that she has overweight and need to reduce it at any cost. The disordered mind forced June to reject the treatment options though the feeding tube. June may reconsider her decision later when she gets out of her mental problems after the treatment. The hospital should provide treatment necessary for June to come out from her defective mindset and then decide about her future rather than allowing her to stick to her decision under the influence of the defective mind. Some of the prominent philosophers like Immanuel Kant and John Locke rejected the concept of assisted suicide. Locke argued that life is an inalienable right, which cannot be taken from, or given away by an individual. In Kant’s opinion, the proper end of rational beings requires self-preservation, and letting a person to die would therefore be inconsistent with the fundamental value of human life (THE ETHICAL DEBATE, 2001, p.81).In short, the hospital authorities cannot justify their action legally or ethically, if they accept the claims of June. Life is the most precious thing in this world and nobody knows from where we come and where we go. Under such circumstances, the hospital authorities should take every action to save the life of June rather than assisting her in finishing it. Conclusions Life is the most precious thing in this world and the duty of medical science is to save it at any cost rather than assisting to destroy it. Patients’ decisions and interests can be considered seriously only if the patient has the physical and mental health to take rational decisions. In all the other cases, the future treatment of a patient should be decided by the doctor in consultation with the immediate relatives. In June’s case, the ex husband has no legal authority over her and his opinions cannot be taken seriously by the doctor. June’s parents have every right to take a decision about the future treatment options available to June. References 1. Drickamer Margaret A. MD; Lee Melinda A., MD; and Ganzini Linda, MD (2004) Practical Issues in Physician-Assisted Suicide, Retrieved on 25 May 2010 from http://www.annals.org/content/126/2/146.full 2. Patient bill of right, (2010) Retrieved on 25 may 2010 from http://www.cc.nih.gov/participate/patientinfo/legal/bill_of_rights.shtml 3. Physician-Assisted Suicide, (2008), Retrieved on 25 may 2010 from http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/pas.html 4. THE ETHICAL DEBATE, (2001), Retrieved on 25 may 2010 from http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/consumer/patient/chap5.htm 5. What is Anorexia? What is Bulimia?, (2010), Retrieved on 25 may 2010 from http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/105102.php Read More