- PHI FPX 3200 Assessment 3 Should We Withhold Life Support? The Mr. Martinez Case.
Should We Withhold Life Support? The Mr. Martinez Case
It is very pertinent that the issue of switching off the life support has a lot of ethical and emotional implications. For instance, while considering the question of whether or not to withdraw life support, the authors argue that healthcare givers should stick to the principle of beneficence most interventions should be done for the benefit of the client, nonmaleficence; this states that we should not do any harm and finally patient’s autonomy this states that a patient should have a right on decisions that affect them.
-
Mr. Martinez’s Case Description
It turns out that Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease has been officially identified in his case, the patient’s name with full adequate information – Mr. Martinez. He declined to undergo CPR and several other life-supporting actions since he understood that they would not in any way improve his situation. This comes out clearly in the “Do Not Resuscitate” (DNR) that he and his wife had agreed to, where he to be placed on life support if required, and given a poor prognosis.
This decision in Martinez has some moral concerns because on the one hand, Martinez has a right over his own life and what should happen to him as regards his health, while on the other hand, healthcare providers are under the principle of nonmaleficence and therefore, to the best of their ability, should ensure their patients do not come to harm. Doctors and Nurses need to respect the patients’ rights of autonomy and allow the patient to receive what he or she asked to have.
Moral Issues Associated with Limiting Life Support
Many people have moral dilemmas in their hearts over one decision, that is to pull off the life support. The two arguments for keeping someone alive are based on moral reasons stating that it would be very wrong to let the person die and at the same time the lack of the person’s wishes makes it wrong to make them suffer anymore.
When healthcare practitioners and caregivers decide to use life support many ethical and moral issues come into play. Some of these concerns include; paternalism, non-malfeasance, distributive justice, family members’ impact, and self-actualization and autonomy as people’s rights to make informed choices for themselves (Barello et al., 2020).
PHI FPX 3200 Assessment 3 Should We Withhold Life Support? The Mr. Martinez Case
Autonomy is the patients’ control to deny therapy that they never require or choose an appropriate treatment they need. However, as has been previously noted, the subject matter of end-of-life care is sensitive and emotionally charged, so this approach acquires special meaning. Patient self-determination or a patient’s right to self-decision is one of the core ethical standards within the medical field. This is so because, as noted by Zhang (2020), healthcare providers have the duty of non-maleficence to their patients and should at all times act in their patient’s best interest.
There are certain circumstances, when it is to exacerbate unbearable pain or suffering, lessening the volume of the life-prolonging treatment should be provided. However, other factors should be taken into consideration during the definition of the optimal level of life support that should be provided to balance the opportunities given to the needy, and the resources available for this purpose were correlated with the thoughts about distributive fairness.
The first one is the effective and efficient access to healthcare resources which is widely defined by no one should be deprived of essential healthcare resources regardless of their financial capacity. It may however be very hard for healthcare practitioners to make this decision when facing constraints in resource use (Soar et al., 2019). Before coming up with a decision to decrease life support, the availability of the resources and their distribution should be checked.
-
Assumptions
Several assumptions have been made in the study of end-of-life care which shape its practice. First, there’s the ethical consideration: on the one hand, it is wrong for patients to have such feelings and desires to die but on the other hand, it is wrong for healthcare practitioners to disregard the patients’ decisions. It’s quite simple: many people believe that people should be allowed to make their own decisions about their medical treatment, including when they are dying (Flammer et al., 2020).
Besides, doctors and nurses are required to make decisions that would be most beneficial to the individual and at the same time, be safe for the patient. If these assumptions are understood by caregivers and other health care professionals they may be better placed to help the patients and the families they are attending.
Ethical Principles When Considering Limiting Life Support
There are a number of ethical considerations that must be taken when deciding on the amount, intensity, and manner of life support to be delivered. The following ethical considerations should be followed when making this decision. A patient should also be honored when he or she decides on which way he or she wants to be treated. About the principle of beneficence, the healthcare providers should act in the best interest of their patient, and conclude if continuing the therapy would be beneficial in reducing the suffering of the patient.
In nonmaleficence respect, a physician should not harm their patients and should think about the usefulness of the treatment and the risks of its advancement (Stein, 2021). Last, it is also expected that healthcare resources are utilized and distributed fairly and equitably as proposed in the concept of fairness. An ethical one is more specifically a decision that is aligned with the patient’s values and rightness.
Ethical principles are basic to health care because they facilitate making correct decisions that enhance patients’ care. This is especially important in the case of terminal illness patients because the healthcare practitioners must make often a difficult decision between prolonging the patient’s life with life-prolonging therapies or offering palliative care (Omidifar et al., 2022).
One might thus ignore ethical standards in the case and such an act can have a serious and many times extensive impact. Lack of consideration of respect for autonomy may lead to patients being treated against their wishes for treatment, which would cause them suffering and to some extent may lead to violation of their human rights. Social distancing may decrease patient’s and HCPs’ reliability and their ability to express themselves, which could make the delivery of EOL care even more challenging (Rezaei Aghdam et al., 2019).
Man should not turn the other cheek and allow patients to go through unnecessary pains from therapies that serve no purpose if the issue of beneficence is dismissed. Nonmaleficence is an important virtue in areas where troubles or medical malpractice can harm patients who are at life’s end. Last but not least, denying justice can also ensure the continuity of inequality in society and the economy, which is quite risky to the already struggling minorities who may find it quite hard to get to the hospitals in the first place.
Important Considerations when Contemplating Limiting Life Support
Deciding whether to remove life-support is again a very sensitive and sensitive issue that could be arrived at after some factors have been put into consideration. Doctors have a very delicate role to play in society because they have to fulfill the wants and expectations of patients while having to adhere to the available options in rendering the treatment as well as the set ethics.
Analyzing the case of Mr. Martinez, who has decided not to use CPR and other certain life-saving measures after he has been diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) it is possible to distinguish a number of essential considerations and questions. First, healthcare providers should not harm a first standard of responsible care, thus patients should decide on the kind of treatment they want (Ghiggia et al., 2021). Mr. Martinez has the right to refuse any treatment, therefore, they have a signed DNR order which also backs up his decision not to use any life-sustaining measures.
The next consideration that medical professionals should make before pulling off the plug is the patient’s prognosis. Mr. Martinez is suffering from COPD and hence there are possibilities that medical treatment will not help him. Therefore, to some extent, there can be constraints towards the benefits that accrue from life-prolonging drugs. Thirdly, before considering the removal of life-supporting treatment, the family may also have to think about what kind of life the patient would be able to live in the future.
One might think that, to Mr. Martinez, quality of life is more important than quantity of life, therefore, the decision is not to use life support measures. Thus, before applying any treatments, physicians and other members of the healthcare team should think through the goals of the patient’s healthcare plan and how the treatments will help achieve the patient’s goals (Minello et al., 2019).
The decision of the extinction of patronized care also requires ethical and legal consideration. The concept of the right to refuse treatment means that Mr. Martinez was free to avoid this treatment, The signed DNR order means that he made an informed decision to do so. While dealing with patients that have a terminal illness, healthcare practitioners have not only legal but also ethical duties. The healthcare practitioners can ensure they are delivering the positive assurance that they are treating the patients and prioritizing their interests by observing the following (Blomberg et al., 2019).
Conclusion
Last but not least there are so many factors to consider while concluding the issue of withholding or limiting the continued provision of life-sustaining measures. To me, it is a hard ethical decision. Evaluating the best interests of the patient requires respecting the patient’s wishes and right to make such decisions interacting with the notions of justice, nonmaleficence, and beneficence referring to the case of Mr. Martinez.
The clinicians invariably have to grapple with the decision of whether to withdraw or to continue the life-prolonging treatment beneficial to the quality and length of life of the concerned patient. In the end, one has to make some decision that is ethically right, rational, and not counter to the patient and his/her expectations of ethical behavior. Read more about our sample PHI FPX 3200 Assessment 1 Matrix of Ethical Theories for complete information about this class.
References
Barello, S., Palamenghi, L., & Graffigna, G. (2020). The mediating role of the patient health engagement model on the relationship between patient-perceived autonomy supportive healthcare climate and health literacy skills. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(5), 1741.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051741
Blomberg, A.-C., Bisholt, B., & Lindwall, L. (2019). Value conflicts in perioperative practice. Nursing Ethics, 26(7-8), 2213–2224.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733018798169
Childress, J. F., & Beauchamp, T. L. (2021). Common morality principles in biomedical ethics: Responses to critics. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 31(2), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0963180121000566
Cohen, I. G., Crespo, A. M., & White, D. B. (2020). Potential legal liability for withdrawing or withholding ventilators during COVID-19. JAMA.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.5442
Flammer, E., Frank, U., & Steinert, T. (2020). Freedom restrictive coercive measures in forensic psychiatry. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00146
Ghiggia, A., Pierotti, V., Tesio, V., & Bovero, A. (2021). Personality matters: Relationship between personality characteristics, spirituality, demoralization, and perceived quality of life in a sample of end-of-life cancer patients.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06363
Minello, C., George, B., Allano, G., Maindet, C., Burnod, A., & Lemaire, A. (2019). Assessing cancer pain: The first step toward improving patients’ quality of life. Supportive Care in Cancer, 27(8), 3095–3104.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-04825-x
Omidifar, N., bafti, A. H., Shokripour, M., Amini, M., Erana-Rojas, I. E., & Moghimizadeh, M. (2022). Pathologists’ professional lifestyle: Excellence in practice, ethics, education, health promotion, and personal life. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 11.
https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_470_21
Rababa, M., & Al-Rawashdeh, S. (2020). Critical care nurses’ critical thinking and decision-making related to pain management. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, 63, 103000.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2020.103000
Rezaei Aghdam, A., Watson, J., Cliff, C., & Miah, S. J. (2019). Improving theoretical understanding towards patient-driven healthcare innovation: Online value co-creation perspective: A systematic review (preprint). Journal of Medical Internet Research.
Soar, J., Maconochie, I., Wyckoff, M. H., Olasveengen, T. M., Singletary, E. M., Greif, R., Aickin, R., Bhanji, F., Donnino, M. Bendall, J., Berg, K. M., Berry, D. C., Bigham, B. L., & Bingham, R. (2019). 2019 International consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations: Circulation, 140(24), e826–e880.
https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000734
Stein, E., & Song, S. J. (2021). Ethical challenges of nonmaleficence in mental health care for forcibly displaced children and adolescents. Global Mental Health Ethics, 225–244.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66296-7_14
Zhang, Z., & Min, X. (2020). The ethical dilemma of truth-telling in healthcare in china. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 17.