The Patients Rights While Providing Care - Essay Example

 Introduction Patients’ free consent to medication and intervention is an essential part of medical ethics and the international human rights as provided for in the law. Consent to treatment is the principle that a patient must give their permission before they receive any medical treatment or examination. Such a principle must be done based on a preliminary examination by a nurse or clinician. Consent is thus required from a patient regardless of the intervention from a physical examination to organ donation. Consent can either be given verbally or in writing. Verbal consent can be issued by the patients saying that they are happy to have an examination or treatment while on the contrary written consent can be via signing a consent form for surgery. In addition, a person may passively allow treatment by holding out an arm to demonstrate their happiness to have their bloods taken for a test. Nonetheless, the primary challenge in my practice arises from the fact that the capacity to consent is yet from being tested, and the benefits and risks have been illustrated. In this case, capacity refers to the ability to use and understand information to make a sound decision, and communicate any decision made to the respective caregivers. A valid consent must be voluntary and informed, and the patient consenting must can make such decision. A voluntary consent simply the decision to either consent or not to consent to treatment and must be made by the person themselves and must never be influenced by pressure from medical staff, family and friends. Whereas informed consent is where the patient has to be issued with all the pertinent information in terms of what the treatment is all about including the benefits and the risks attached beside whether there are reasonable option interventions and whatever will occur if such a treatment is not executed or delayed. A valid consent is also determined by capacity in which a nurse must be able to determine that capability of the patient to give a consent that means they understand the information is given to them and the can utilize such information to make a rational and informed decision (GRISSO & APPELBAUM 1998, p. 56). In case an adult has the capacity to make a voluntary and informed decision to consent or refuse a particular treatment or examination, the law requires that such a decision must be honored even if the refusal would collapse into death or death of the unborn. On the other hand, where a patient has no capacity to make a decision about their treatment, the nurse examining them can advance and give the treatment if they believe it is in the patient best interests. However, the clinician must take reasonable steps to seek advice from the patients’ relatives, family and friends before making any decisions. Body Nevertheless, this compromising situation leads to an ethical dilemma that affect my daily activities as a community healthcare assistant practitioner with the district nursing team. I am always concerned and may fail to administer insulin, bandaging, and wound dressing, as well as venipuncture (taking bloods). Indeed, a patient might be agonizing in pain because of possible respiratory depression, wounds, and that can at times culminates to severe complication and even to some acute levels, death. Conversely, I have always faced a dilemma on whether to leave the patient continuously agonize and writhe in such pain or to administer insulin or dress wounds even without the patients’ consent. Nevertheless, such decisions might prove reasonable but the major hurdles lie with patient family and relatives and even with the patient’s themselves. I am thus constrained as the family, or the patient may have a right to file a case against my actions however much I may have helped the patient. Another dilemmatic situation arises where a patient refuses to get parental nutritional support and always find myself in a fixed circumstance with respect to whatever decisions to make. The prerequisite is by law that a nurse should respect the patients’ rights while providing care, however, it will be unethical to avoid giving the patient food and drugs as well as other practice-attached interventions that help in the body function and healing. Accordingly, most of my decision have been influenced by Aquinas’ Principle of Double Effect (PDE). The principle of double effect has enabled me to understand that the universe is organized such that each thing in it has a purpose or goal (Curran, 2006). The principle of double effect helps me improve my reasoning that culminates to discovering and achieving such dilemmatic objectives. Action that are in line with my natural goal as a practitioner is right while the contradicting actions are wrong. Thus, reasoning as envisaged in Aquinas’s Principle help me develop my intellect and since living things are liable to preserve their lives, rebuffing drugs to me is wrong and in contradiction of nature while agonizing in severe pain. The Principle Double Effect further helps me uncover that my contemplated actions will have good or bad effects leading to an ethical dilemma. My decisions are benchmarked on the facts that, I have to evaluate proactively and meet such provisions in this doctrine such as The action itself is morally nonaligned or good. The bad effect is never means by which the right effect is attained. The good effect is at least equivalent in prominence to the bad effect. The motivation must be the accomplishment of the good effect only. However, the challenge still persists as I have to balance such key elements of the principle of double effect with the elements of the principle of consent. The primary aim of the principle of double effect is the provision of a specific guidelines necessary to determine when it is ethically permissible for a human being to indulge in conduct in pursuit of a good end with full knowledge that the conduct will also result in bad outcomes. The principle of double effect thus seems contradictory to that of consent and this further complicates my decisions with one end being pulled down by legal provisions and, on the other hand, my pursuit to always remain ethical in my practice (Curran 2006, p. 34). The principle of double effect asserts that, ‘in cases where an agent contemplates conduct that has both good effects and bad effects, the course of conduct selected is ethically permissible only if it is not wrong in itself and if it does not require that one directly intend the bad result.’ The question here is to determine whether the provisions of the principle of double effect meets the requirement of consent and if it does not what direction should I take. My conduct, draws from such examples that have been grounded on this doctrine, for instance, should a pain-killing drug be administered to a patient suffering intense, unendurable pain? A physician may prescribe, and a nurse may administer doses of morphine that are large enough to relieve the pain, but will also hasten death. Conduct focused on relieving pain is ethically legitimate in itself since the patient’s death was never intended nor was it the means by which the pain was to be relieved. Some of the general principle of consent that have always presented daunting challenges in my practice include, Competent adult patients are entitled to refuse treatment, even where it would clearly benefit their health. A competent pregnant woman may refuse any treatment even if that would be detrimental to the fetus Patient can change their minds and withdraw consent at any time as long as they have the capacity to do so Unexpected decisions do not imply that the patient is incompetent but rather demonstrate a need for further information or illustration It is best for the person actually treating the patient to seek the patient’s consent. Consent and Patients Best Interest Another challenge in my practices best on the principle of consent is the provision that at all time the patients’ best interest overrule. The challenge arises where the patient’s own wishes and values, as well as advance decisions, cannot be easily ascertained, and I have to uphold their best interest (BOYD 2007, p. 65). The likelihood of the patient improving after the intervention is also a factor that presents a problem. In addition, I have to consider any knowledge about the patient’s religious, cultural, welfare attorney, court guardians and other medical perception that might influence the patients’ wishes. Besides determining the best option that is least restrictive of the patient’s future choices also present a hard task. Consent and Emergency Treatment In the case of emergency, the law requires that consent should be sought for competent patients. In cases where the consent cannot be acquired, doctors provide medical treatment that is in the patient’ best interests and immediately necessary to salvage life or avoid significant deterioration in health. Nonetheless, if there is a clear evidence of a valid advance refusal a particular treatment, showing that treatment should never be executed, if that patient has a welfare appointed attorney there is need for him to be consulted. Reference BOYD, M. (2007). Psychiatric nursing. Philadelphia, Pa, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Curran, C. E. (2006). Loyal Dissent: Memoir of a Catholic Theologian. Washington: Georgetown University Press. GRISSO, T., & APPELBAUM, P. S. (1998). Assessing competence to consent to treatment: a guide for physicians and other health professionals. New York, Oxford University Press. HARVEY, C. J. (2005). Human rights in the community: rights as agents for change. Oxford [u.a.], Hart. KILLION, S. W., & DEMPSKI, K. (2006). Legal and ethical issues. Sudbury, Mass, Jones and Bartlett. KOSLOWSKI, P. (2001). Principles of ethical economy. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. LYNCH, J. (2011). Consent to treatment. Oxford, Radcliffe Pub. MATZO, M., & SHERMAN, D. W. (2010). Palliative care nursing: quality care to the end of life. New York, Springer Pub. Co. O'DONNELL, J. T. (2005). Drug injury: liability, analysis and prevention. Tucson, Lawyers & Judges Publishing Company. OVSIEW, F., & MUNICH, R. L. (2008). Principles of inpatient psychiatry. Philadelphia, Pa, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. POZGAR, G. D. (2007). Legal aspects of health care administration. Sudbury, MA, Jones and Bartlett Publishers. ROWLAND, H. S., & ROWLAND, B. L. (1997). Nursing administration handbook. Gaithersburg, Md, Aspen Publishers. SHAW, R. J., & DEMASO, D. R. (2010). Textbook of pediatric psychosomatic medicine. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Pub. http://appi.org. SHIPPEE-RICE, R. V., FETZER, S. J., & LONG, J. V. (2012). Gerioperative nursing care: principles and practices of surgical care for the older adult. New York, Springer. SIMON, R. I., & SHUMAN, D. W. (2007). Clinical manual of psychiatry and law. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Pub. http://appi.org. WERRY, J. S., & AMAN, M. G. (1999). Practitioner's guide to psychoactive drugs for children and adolescents. New York, Plenum Medical Book Co. Read More