The ethical issue in this situation is whether JoEllen should be placed on a life support machine against her decision or adhere to the directive that she provided and let her be in a dire condition needing medical attention. The two challenges are that her health is deteriorating while she had already drafted a directive against life support. JoEllen had her reasons as first for overdosing on the medications, mixing the prescriptions with alcohol, and further stating that she needs no life support. Also, she commented before she became unresponsive, and it brings about different questions. The main challenge is that she has become unresponsive at a critical time that she needs appropriate medical care. It is also challenging to identify any history of JoEllen being suicidal or suffering from mental illness.
Ethically, it would be appropriate to place JoEllen on a life support machine and save on her life. In the healthcare environment, employees have to adhere to moral codes of conduct, which is to respect the patients while at the same time, ensure that lives are saved. JoEllen’s life hangs on the balance and needs attention to be protected. Lots of questions arise in the ethical issue which possesses barriers in treating JoEllen. Her autonomy is vital for consideration, but before the arrival of her advanced directive, JoEllen became unresponsive. The best question to consider is that it will be in her best interest to follow the instruction? How much authority does the family members have to decide on the life of JoEllen? Regardless of the ethical dilemma, three normative theories can be applied in the ethical considerations include Virtue theory, Consequential, and Deontological theories.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Virtue Ethics:
Virtue ethics is described in depth by Aristotle, and it emerges as a better way to guarantee the individual rights of actions. In theory, the aim is to make sure that the different agents get a strong character, which are virtues that are appropriate towards handling the situation. Aristotle indicates that attributes are among the strengths that bring success in situations while vices are weaknesses ( Hart, 2019) . Virtue ethical theory can be applied to the case scenario and have the healthcare professionals handling JoEllen’s case to base their decisions on the method. The professionals should develop strong character and try to save JoEllen’s life. On the contrary, they can show weaknesses by respecting the advance directive and see the woman’s life deteriorating. In Virtue of ethics, one can show character or choose vices. I would advise the healthcare professionals to practice style by saving JoEllen’s life. Later, when she becomes responsive, JoEllen should be subjected to mental health assessment to ascertain her reasons for overdose. An advantage of the theory is that it is open for easy understanding and makes tough decisions in enabling healthcare professionals to exhibit positive character or a negative character. However, the disadvantage of the theory is that weakness is portrayed as a cowardly character. Every individual has flaws, but that does not mean that the individuals are cowards.
Deontological ethics theory
The second theory for application is the Deontological ethics theory. It is developed by Immanuel Kant, and he gives an in-depth explanation of the strengths and weaknesses of the method. It applies that through the theory, it is ethical when individuals do their duty as it is required by the rules. Therefore, being moral means that individuals are to do things because they believe what they are doing is right ( Österberg, 2019) . Deontological theory can be applied to the case scenario, and healthcare professionals have to do the right thing, which is to save on the life of the woman as opposed to letting her die. The second right thing that they can do is to obey the directive that JoEllen had written initially and let her be without placing her on life support. The theory possesses confusion as healthcare rules have to be followed, as well as JoEllen’s rules. The advantage of the approach is that it helps individuals distinguish between what is right and wrong. The disadvantage is that it does not allow for compromise, and it can lead to death, as in the case of JoEllen.
Consequentialist ethical theory
The third theory is the Consequentialist ethical theory authored by Mill Stuart. The theory states that the world should be made a better place by focusing on functional outcomes from the process. The actions that individuals undertake should bring happiness to all the citizens and, if not the majority of the population ( Hampton, Warburton & Sandøe, 2019) . It relates to the healthcare situation by providing healthcare professionals with an opportunity that they will use to make the best outcome from the situation. The best situation, in this case, is JoEllen, her son, and also the healthcare environment. The consequences of such actions will also be assessed. For example, the best outcome will be to save her life and bring happiness to her son, the hospital, and other family members. The advantage of the theory is that it brings about positivity by making the world better and achieving happiness among the majority of community members. The disadvantage is that individuals get worried about the consequences, such as having thoughts on what will happen from the process.
Ethical position in the case
The right thing for healthcare professionals to do would place her on a life support machine and try to get the best in the world by saving a life. It is supported by Consequentialist theory. The consequences of the action will include making the hospital, her son, and other family members to be happy that they still have JoEllen than cause the family members grief of losing a loved one. Healthcare professionals should always strive to have lives and make patients achieve better wellness regardless of their situations.
References
Hart, D. K. (2019). Administration and the ethics of virtue: In all things, choose first for good character and then for technical expertise. In Handbook of administrative ethics (pp. 157- 176). Routledge.
Hampton, J. O., Warburton, B., & Sandøe, P. (2019). Compassionate versus consequentialist conservation. Conservation Biology , 33 (4), 751-759.
Österberg, J. (2019). Deontological Ethics: Exposition. In Towards Reunion in Ethics (pp. 27- 59). Springer, Cham.
