Notably, medical ethics is a useful application of moral values that are destined to benefit the patient. It is essential for a health worker to follow definite ethical standards and code of conduct. In case someone is injured due to a breach of duty, there are penalties to pay which include serving a jail term, financial loss or loss of medical license. In this paper, we are going to study and analyze case scenarios involving Karen Ann Quinlan and Terri Schiavo and later a case example involving Mrs. Mary Smith.
Apparently, both cases between Karen Ann Quinlan and Terri Schiavo involves women who faced a state named as a persistent vegetative state. They both required a feeding tube or assistance of artificial nutrition and hydration in order for them to survive. There was no conflict between doctors and family members in both cases as they both wanted legal procedures to be followed in order to remove the life-supporting systems. In these cases, the courts ruled that there was clear and convincing evidence showing that there was a need to remove both of them from the life-supporting systems. Both cases followed many legal proceedings on whether or not to remove the feeding tube. Both instances also answer the question whether patient, parents or next of kin had a right to decide on to withdraw life support systems.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
There are notable differences in the two cases. For instance, there was an inter-family conflict between Terri's husband and her parents regarding the removal of what was supporting the life of Terri. Terri's husband wanted it removed whereas her parents did not want it removed. In the case of Terri, there was evidence that she did not want to be put in a life-supporting machine, but in the case of Karen, it was the decision of her parents to remove her from the life-supporting machine.
The two cases are of great importance and help a lot in understanding the laws and ethics. Without guidelines about laws and ethics, medical malpractice would go unpunished and lives lost. The two cases help in one making the right decision without breaking the law thus avoiding any misconduct. In the two cases, the life-supporting machine was withdrawn, and this did not lead to any malpractice since they followed the laws required.
In essence, the two cases will have positive impact in future similar cases. This is because the two cases have created knowledge regarding federal/state laws. Due to this cases, there are experts who are now advising patients to start sensitive conversations with their medical practitioners regardless of their age. This is so since both Karen and Terri were both in their twenties and could have spoken about their issues to their doctors' long time ago and details were taken.
The court took a right decision by appointing Karen's father and Terri's husband as their representatives. This is so because of this people, Terri's husband and Karen's father had a stayed together for a period and most probably would have known what Terri and Karen could have preferred. This is evident when Karen's husband had said that Karen had said that she would not have wished to be put in a life-supporting machine if she was in a condition which was irreversible.
Substituted judgment is when a decision is made by a person when a patient lacks decision-making capacity. Like in the case where Karen's parents and Terri's husband made decisions about withdrawing the life support machines. These decisions have to made in conformity with patient's wishes or expressed preferences. Terri had wished that she should not be kept in a life-supporting apparatus.
In our case example of Mrs. Mary Smith, it is clear that in one occasion, moral ethics and codes of conduct were strictly followed and in the other instance, the health officers did not follow the ethics and code of conduct required. In the first example, no legal actions were taken since the health facility admitted their mistake and took care of all the cost of the care for her injuries. In the second instance the services are poor, and even after Mrs. Mary Smith had an accident, the technologist does not make follow up call to know how she was doing. This makes Mrs. Mary Smith sue the company for negligence. This case scenario shows that following good ethics and code of conduct is essential and prevents one from getting punished for legal actions.
In conclusion, it should be noted that no matter how true one's analysis is, decisions near the end of life are not easy and should be handled with care. Uncertainty in these decisions is not an excuse to not engage moral and ethical reasoning, and people should learn to respect patients.
