Undue Patient Service in a Hospital from Business Management Perspective

Introduction 

Myron Morse is the chairman of the board of Memorial Hospital, which has a reputation as a venerable institution having served the community for more than a record 80 years. It is synonymous with strides in research together with patient care specializing in cardiovascular diseases, neurology, emergency medicine, geriatrics together with palliative medicine. It came to the attention of the board of the hospital that the institution had been providing “illegal” care to a staggering 14 percent of patients who were in dire need of extensive hospice and end of life care. The providence of undue services to patients resulted I government investigation of the hospital together with the hospital risking being subjected to a fine by the government for abuse of Medicaid services. 

The board members’ analysis of the situation left no doubt that the hospital’s long serving and exception Dr. Figuerllo Dirk had acted without his jurisdiction in his decision to extend service to overdue patients. The CEO on the contrary is of the opinion that it was not within the power of the hospital, government or single person to dictate the length of an individual’s life as long as they needed care. Board members felt that while 14% would initially feel like an inconsequential portion of the patient population, the financial and reputational ramifications for the hospital surpassed this cost. The board of the hospital therefore faces the dilemma on whether to defend the action of the institution to extend vital end of life services to patients or to consider the monetary implications and costs of such a decision. 

Main body 

In the decision making criteria regarding the providence of end of life and hospice care to individuals, research has revealed that it is vital for practitioners to consider the ethical dilemma associated with end of life decisions among various patients ( Popesko et al., 2015) . The selling of the PCC unit to Tom Windwood would result in the curtailment of critical hospice care services given the fact that a for profit organization would critically analyze patients before admittance. This would result in denial of critical services especially to patients who require extensive service or even special care. It is recommendable for the board to disregard the option to sell off the unit and instead explore the option of getting the government on board with the commitment to consideration of all patients universally. 

Furthermore, it is vital for the board to be conscious of the risk to its reputation in addition to making ideal decisions over how to attend to the matter. The board should make a public announcement through the press expressing regret over the financial situation while maintaining that it indeed acted in an ethical manner with the interest of patients at heart ( Martin et al., 2018) . The announcement should be made in a timely manner to ensure that the institution has control of the narrative given the fact that it is critical for the hospital’s donors and well-wishers to aid in alleviating the debt. 

Within the organization, the CEO shall be held accountable for the prevalence of the practice given the fact that it occurred under his tenure and with his knowledge. Furthermore, the CEO together with the employees of the hospital failed to inform the members of the board of the practice. To this effect therefore, information on the inquiry should be shared with all the members of the PCC staff given the fact that they are liable for acting in contrast with the provisions of the laws concerning Medicaid cover ( Popesko et al., 2015) . 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, it is vital to recognize the fact that the healthcare industry has recognized the vital nature of hospice care which has been accompanied by a significant increase in the number of individuals who seek end of life care ( Macauley, 2018) . To this extent, care givers are faced with the dilemma of whether to consider the profit margin during the consideration for admittance and administration of care or whether the care should be provided regardless ( Popesko et al., 2015) . Moreover, the decision making process is largely dependent on the leadership of hospice institutions and their values and policies considering the determination of whether the affordability of care should determine the access to care. 

While it is key to recognize the vitality of the financial stability for healthcare institutions, they are often faced with the ethical dilemma of whether to prioritize health care or whether to mind the costs of this healthcare ( Macauley, 2018) . However, research maintains that it is critical for health institutions and the government to be able to find the vital balance between the cost of care and the necessity of care to those who may not afford it. Hospice institution leaders should therefore additionally advocate for increment in government funding and insurance providence for end of life care for all patients who seek such kinds of medical services ( Popesko et al., 2015) . In addition to this, it is in the place of hospital leaders to establish policies which will ensure critical care is offered to those who desperately require it despite of whether they can or cannot afford this care. 

References 

Macauley, R. C. (2018).  Ethics in Palliative Care . Oxford University Press. 

Martin, M., Martin, K. D., & French, J. J. (2018). People, Profit, and Promotion: When Health Care is Business.  Journal of the Academy of Business Education ,  19 . 

Popesko, B., Novák, P., & Papadaki, Š. (2015). Measuring diagnosis and patient profitability in healthcare: economics vs ethics.  Economics and Sociology .