- 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 pertinent that the issue of switching off life support has many ethical and emotional implications. For instance, while considering whether or not to withdraw life support, the authors argue that healthcare providers should adhere to the principle of beneficence. Most interventions should be done for the client’s benefit; nonmaleficence states that we should not do any harm, and finally, patient autonomy. This states that patients should have the right to make decisions that affect them.
- Martinez’s Case Description
It turns out that Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease has been officially identified in his case, the patient’s name with complete 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 is to be placed on life support if required and given a poor prognosis.
This decision in Martinez raises some moral concerns because, on the one hand, Martinez has a right to his own life and what should happen to him regarding his health. On the other hand, healthcare providers are under the principle of nonmaleficence and, therefore, should ensure their patients do not come to harm. Doctors and Nurses must respect the patient’s autonomy rights and allow the patient to receive what he asks for.
Moral Issues Associated with Limiting Life Support
Many people have moral dilemmas over one decision: to withdraw support. The two arguments for keeping someone alive are based on moral reasons: 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. These concerns include paternalism, non-malfeasance, distributive justice, family members’ impact, and self-actualization and autonomy as people’s right to make informed choices (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 previously noted, 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 Zhang (2020) noted, healthcare providers have the duty of nonmaleficence to their patients and should always act in their patient’s best interest.
In certain circumstances, lessening the volume of life-prolonging treatment should be provided to exacerbate unbearable pain or suffering. However, other factors should be considered when defining the optimal level of life support to balance the opportunities given to people in need, and the resources available for this purpose were correlated with thoughts about distributive fairness.
The first one is effective and efficient access to healthcare resources, which is widely defined as the fact that no one should be deprived of essential healthcare resources regardless of financial capacity. However, it may be challenging for healthcare practitioners to make this decision when facing constraints in resource use (Soar et al., 2019). Before deciding 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 have shaped its practice. First, there is 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 terrible for healthcare practitioners to disregard the patients’ decisions. It is pretty 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 benefit the individual and be safe for the patient. If caregivers and other healthcare professionals understand these assumptions, they may be better placed to help the patients and the families they are attending to.
Ethical Principles When Considering Limiting Life Support
When deciding on the amount, intensity, and manner of life support to be delivered, several ethical considerations must be taken. The following ethical considerations should be followed when making this decision. Patients should also be honored when deciding how they want to be treated. Regarding beneficence, healthcare providers should act in their patient’s best interests and conclude whether continuing the therapy would be beneficial in reducing the patients’ suffering.
Ethical Principles in End-of-Life Care
In nonmaleficence respect, a physician should not harm their patients and should consider 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 decision is, more specifically, one that is aligned with the patient’s values and rightness.
Ethical principles are fundamental to healthcare because they facilitate making correct decisions that enhance patients’ care. This is especially important in the case of terminal illness patients, such as in the PHI FPX 3200 Assessment 3 Should We Withhold Life Support? The Mr. Martinez Case, where healthcare practitioners must often make 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 profound and 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 violate their human rights. Social distancing may decrease patient and HCPs’ reliability and ability to express themselves, making the delivery of EOL care even more challenging (Rezaei Aghdam et al., 2019).
A 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 essential in areas where troubles or medical malpractice can harm patients 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.
Essential Considerations when Contemplating Limiting Life Support
Deciding whether to remove life support is again a very sensitive issue that could be arrived at after some factors have been considered. Doctors have a very delicate role to play in society because they have to fulfill the wants and expectations of patients while adhering to the available options in rendering the treatment as well as the set ethics.
Analyzing the case of Mr. Martinez, who decided not to use CPR and other specific life-saving measures after he was diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), it is possible to distinguish several essential considerations and questions. First, healthcare providers should not harm a first standard of responsible care. Thus, patients should decide on their desired treatment (Ghiggia et al., 2021). Mr. Martinez has the right to refuse any treatment. Therefore, they have a signed DNR order, which backs up his decision not to use any life-sustaining measures.
Ethical Considerations in Care
The patient’s prognosis is the next consideration that medical professionals should make before patients get the plug. 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.
To Mr. Martinez, quality of life is more important than quantity. Therefore, the decision is not to use life support measures. Thus, before applying any treatments, physicians and other healthcare team members 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 to extinction patronized care also requires ethical and legal considerations. 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. While dealing with patients who 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, many factors must be considered when deciding whether to withhold or limit the continued provision of life-sustaining measures. It is a complex ethical decision. Evaluating the best interests of the patient requires respecting the patient’s wishes and right to make such decisions and interacting with the notions of justice, nonmaleficence, and beneficence, as referred to in the case of Mr. Martinez.
The clinicians invariably have to grapple with whether to withdraw or continue the life-prolonging treatment beneficial to the concerned patient’s quality and length of life. In the end, one has to make an ethically right and rational decision that does not counter the patient’s 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.