PHI2603-Disc5
This is a graded discussion: 30 points possible
due -
Discussion 5 18 18
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 1 of 22
In the episode, The Tyrant, Dr. Cuddy makes a decision about a Sitibi
woman who is brought into the hospital and told to perform a task. Dr.
Cameron appeals to Dr. Cuddy, but is overruled.
What is this decision?
Who is ethically correct in the situation, Dr. Cuddy, or Dr. Cameron?
Why do you think so?
Submission
Our discussions are a valuable opportunity to have thoughtful conversations
regarding a specific topic. You are required to provide a comprehensive
initial post with 3–4 well-developed paragraphs that include a topic
sentence and at least 3–5 supporting sentences with additional details,
explanations, and examples. In addition, you are required to respond
substantively to the initial posts of at least two other classmates. All posts
should be reflective and well written, meaning free of errors in grammar,
sentence structure, and other mechanics.
Grading
This discussion is worth 30 points toward your final grade and will be
graded using the Discussion Rubric. Please use it as a guide toward
successful completion of this discussion. For information on how to view the
rubric, refer to this Canvas Community Guide
(https://community.canvaslms.com/docs/DOC-10577-4212540120) .
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 2 of 22
Search entries or author
Reply
Unread Subscribe
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/125428)
Lindzi Allen (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/125428)
Jun 30, 2023
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 3 of 22
Reply
In the episode, The Tyrant, Dr. Cuddy makes a decision about a Sitibi
woman who is brought into the hospital and told to perform a task. Dr.
Cameron appeals to Dr. Cuddy, but is overruled. The decision that was
overruled was for the Sitibi woman to "donate" her plasma so the
character that was playing the President, could he get Convalescent
plasma for something called Lasa Fever. This route for treatment upon
further research, is actually still being studied so there is no true data to
say that it would have done the trick anyways.
In this situation, Dr. Cuddy, is the most ethically correct. The woman has
already signed the legal consent to donate the plasma and she is
standing by it. Yes, Dr. Camron does think that the woman is under
duress by her demeaner and obviously stressed body language in the
office, but unless there is proof that the woman was coerced then the
legal paperwork is all they need.
I do find it interesting that even though Dr Chase saved the President
from being assassinated by a man that was posing as a hospital
employee, he still in the end was the one that killed the President. The
falsification of the Scleraderma testing using the woman from the
morgues blood resulted in the wrong medication being administered,
killing the President at the end of the episode. I thought that the Dr.
Foreman would turn him in but at the end of the episode he was shown
to be burning the sign in sheet from the Morgue that was the only thing
that tied Dr. Chase to the morgue trip. This as he stated in the
conversation with Dr. Chase made him an accomplice to the crime.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/89590)
Ansley Read (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/89590)
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 4 of 22
Wednesday
Reply
Good evening Lindzi,
I found it interesting as well that Dr. Chase was the one to ultimately
kill President Dibala, even with the intent of protecting him from an
imposter in the facility. I believe once the line was crossed with
Cameron, Chase flipped scripts and went out of his way to deceive
everyone involved by falsifying information about the president being
diagnosed with Scleroderma, burning the papers of the deceased
who had the disease ( which is its chain of custody and i.d.
acknowledgments), in the trip heading to the morgue and back.
Creating more issues than just allowing man to die of natural causes
anyway. Quite the conundrum, if you ask me.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/1367)
Richard Grego (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/1367)
Thursday
You make a good point about what I think is the central ethical issue
in this situation --the idea that the woman may be (probably is) being
coerced into the treatment. I tend to agree with you, but I'm also
thinking that , while a signed consent form may be technically all they
need to go ahead with the procedure, it could easily be argued (and
probably is the case) that the woman is being coerced into signing
the consent form--so does the consent form make performing the
procedure any more ethically justifiable?
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 5 of 22
Reply
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110927)
Madison Buehnemann (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110927)
Saturday
Reply
Hey guys!
Plot twist! What if Dr. Chase was actually protecting the imposter
from making a mistake that could have gotten him killed by the
Presidents bodyguards when Dr. Chase actually recognized the hero
he could be instead? Dr. Chase was never really against the imposter
(other than sneaking in as a patient) and he made him realize the
type of monster the president actually was. I think was truly the
turning point on Dr. Chases moral compass where he realized he had
the power to save an entire country from more violence. Furthermore,
his conversation with the president when Dr. Cameron didn't allow
him to die by withholding medication, showed that the president was
not likely to ever change based on his beliefs that the only way to "be
a man" was to enact violence and make everyone fear his country
enough to never attack them.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/89590)
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 6 of 22
Ansley Read (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/89590)
Wednesday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 7 of 22
Reply
Good evening everyone, professor,
In the episode of House M.D., The Tyrant, Dr. Cuddy makes a decision
about a situation in regard to a Sitibi woman who was brought into the
hospital to perform a task in aid of President Dibala. The task at hand
was for the Sitbi woman to give her plasma under the assumption that
the president who is infected with "Lasa Fever" could be healed/ helped;
even with the lack of research or knowledge that the disease could be
cured at all.
Dr. Cameron's refusal to perform the task was overruled by Dr. Cuddy. Dr.
Cuddy explains to Cameron that there is legal documentation, consent
from the woman willingly wanting to give blood and she is urging to do
so, so therefore Dr. Cuddy would be in the right and ethically correct. Dr.
Cameron, however, can see that there is a woman in distress and she
shows all the physical signs of a woman who is fearful and clearly being
forced into helping the president, out of the thought of her family being
killed...If there is no documentation available to show exploitation or foul
play, then there's nothing else that can be done.
I feel as though ethics is on a delicate scale of taking
employees'/people(s) emotions into play, while also using a utilitarianism
and consequentialistic approach, meaning in the workplace you can
consider emotions so you help your employees feel heard and valued, but
ultimately what is right and wrong in a work setting should override the
emotional aspect as well regarding a workplace setting. Even though you
can blatantly see that Cameron did not want to assist in the donation of
blood to the dictator who has killed thousands, the woman from the
dictator's hometown insisted, and there is documentation showing she is
willing, so Dr. Cuddy had to make the difficult decision based on facts,
not emotion.
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 8 of 22
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/1367)
Richard Grego (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/1367)
Thursday
Reply
You make a very good case for going ahead with this procedure
based on the signed consent and the woman's own verbal consent.
However, my guess is that an Ethics Board, or even a court of law,
would rule that the doctors reasoned opinion about the entire
situation overrules the formality of paperwork and a verbal consent in
cases like this. So if a doctor has reason to believe that such
coercion is occuring, they are obligated to not perform the procedure,
even if there is a verbal and/or signed consent for--after all, a person
could (and probably was, in this case) be coerced into signing the
form and verbally consenting....cases like this also arise with abused
children and domestic partners, where despite being told otherwise
by the possible victims, healthcare workers are obligated to report
these cases to law enforcement and/or DCF
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/1367)
Richard Grego (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/1367)
Thursday
Reply
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 9 of 22
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110365)
Quinteria Robinson (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110365)
Yesterday
Reply
Hi Ansley,
I agree that ethical issues are more delicate in a professional context.
However, I believe that in a medical situation, you get to witness
individuals in their most undeveloped states. This is why there are
numerous rules and regulations in place for these things because you
need to be on the lookout for things like abuse, coercion, and
psychological components. Therefore, I would assert that I think Dr.
Cameron acted in this situation with the highest ethical standards.
Doctors shouldn't be able to ignore a patient who is exhibiting blatant
signs of compulsion because of paperwork.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110927)
Madison Buehnemann (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110927)
Saturday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 10 of 22
Reply
In the episode Tyrant, Dr. Cuddy makes a (insert the ethic choice that is
sacrifices another for the sake of the group)/protecting the hospital from
physical retaliation from the African Government, in regards to ordering
Dr. Cameron to take the blood from the Sitibi woman.
In my opinion, Dr. Cameron had the right to deny the procedure based on
her suspicions of coercion. I believe that she should have taken it higher
than Cuddy when she was denied based on medical protocols for these
types of situations where reporting was necessary, even with a
consenting adult. I do however see why Dr. Cuddy felt she was protecting
the woman from retaliation, however, I believe she inadvertently just
sacrificed more lives in order to protect 1 based on the allegations and
lawsuits against the president for genocide. These types of situations
have specific procedures to ensure that the doctors are able to withhold
their Hippocratic oath by providing medical services, while protecting
other from crimes such as these. Even if that board of decision makers
feel like she should be able to donate her plasma, This whole episode
had me on the edge of my seat!
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110365)
Quinteria Robinson (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110365)
Yesterday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 11 of 22
Reply
Hi Madison,
I agree that Dr. Cameron has the choice to decline the procedure, but
I don't believe Dr. Cuddy has the right to decide whether to treat a
patient because of retaliation or genocide. Doctors are there to help
people survive no matter what they have done. All other
considerations on why a person should remain alive aren't left up to
the doctors, even if it can be a difficult line to walk and a great burden.
Only in delaying medical care due to warning indications of
compulsion, which is unethical, was Dr. Cameron correct. Dr. Cuddy
faltered by basing her course of action on reprisal. You are absolutely
right that this episode had me on the edge of my seat. Everything is
extremely difficult.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/71694)
Tatiana Johnson (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/71694)
Yesterday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 12 of 22
Reply
Hi Madison,
I understand why you feel Dr. Cuddy sacrifice more lives than she
saved but at the end of the day, doctors signed an oath to give care
to whoever ever no matter their title or actions made in the world. I
honestly believe that saving President Dibala would have been bad
for his country and the Sitibi people but I don't feel like it would have
been ethically right to let him die either. Why change your character
and your morals just because of a madman? Wouldn't that make you
just like him by letting him die?
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/125147)
Lauren Callaway (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/125147)
Yesterday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 13 of 22
Reply
In the episode The Tyrant, a Sitibi woman is brought in who has Lassa
fever by President Dibala (who was just been subpoenaed for human
rights violations like genocide) accompanied by what appears to be a
high ranking military official who presents a consent form for the woman
to donate blood and help treat President Dibala. The men and woman are
insisting that they all consent and agree and are wanting to help cure
President Dibala. Dr. Cameron feels as if the woman is being coerced
into donating blood so she declines to draw blood, so she bring the
woman to Dr. Cuddy's office to explain and ask her opinion on what they
should do.
This is a though one for me to pick a side honestly. I believe Dr. Cameron
is ethically correct, when we learned about the Hippocratic Oath one of
the oaths was "I will enter them for the benefit of the sick, avoiding any
voluntary act of impropriety or corruption..." Dr. Cuddy was acting out of
best interest of avoiding corruption by declining to draw blood in my
option. While the woman did sign a consent form to donate blood it was
seemingly coerced by high ranking people from her country with corrupt
power as Dr. Cuddy mentions in their meeting "I'd rather have a needle
prick on my subconscious than the death of her family members"
implying if they don't draw the woman's blood its possible her family
faces retaliation I believe Dr. Cuddy was morally correct in valuing the
womans family's lives if she doesn't donate blood and honoring the
signed consent form.
I would be interested in knowing if this case got escalated up to a ethics
board how it would be viewed and decided upon. I see how the blood
donation consent form is a legal contract and you should honor that, but
a legally binding contract gets void if someone was coerced into signing.
https://www.nlm.nih.gov/hmd/greek/greek_oath.html
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 14 of 22
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/71694)
Tatiana Johnson (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/71694)
Yesterday
Reply
Hi Lauren,
Great counterpoint to the Hippocratic Oath, I also agree that Dr.
Cameron was ethnically right due to her knowing she was being
coerced but I honestly think neither was wrong if we remove the
ethnicity from the argument. They both had valid points on why Ama
should or shouldn't give up her blood it's just Dr. Cuddy had to make
a hard decision and find a reason to believe that it was the right one,
due to a consent being signed.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/120852)
Hailey Petersen (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/120852)
Yesterday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 15 of 22
Reply
Hello Lauren,
While I choose the opposite standpoint, your take is definitely
compelling. It's interesting that you used the Hippocratic Oath to
back up your point, especially since it pertains to coercion. I would
also be interested to know if it would be viewed by a board, I
definitely feel that if the board knew there was coercion involved,
especially how the woman came off to Dr. Cuddy and Dr. Cameron,
they would deny it or something.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110365)
Quinteria Robinson (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/110365)
Yesterday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 16 of 22
Reply
In the episode, The Tyrant, the decision that Dr. Cuddy made involving the
Sitibi woman, Ama, was to give her plasma to the president Dibala over
her former country. She had overcame Lasa Fever 2 years prior and they
were under the impression that the president also had this illness. Dr.
Cameron appealed to this decision because Ama was exhibiting signs of
coercion even though they had signed paperwork. However Dr. Cuddy
overrules this because she didn’t want to be the reason Ama family died.
It would be challenging to get consensus on which choice was morally
right given the two factors of coercion and retaliation. But I think Dr.
Cameron acted morally appropriately in this circumstance. A doctor is
expected to report any suspicious actions that have the potential to
impair or influence a person or their rights. So, even while I understand
Dr. Cuddy's desire to shield the family from additional harm, I would say it
isn't within her power to assess whether or not that circumstance was
more important than another's rights.
Giving treatment to Dibala is something that was very opinionated upon
the group and a skeptical choice to make. So the whole episode was full
of ethical questions and decisions. Everyone wanted to do what they felt
was the right decision. While Dr. Cameron decision may not have been an
unbiased one, it was one that protected the Sitibi woman rights. Dr. Cuddy
shouldn’t have overturn her appeal.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/120852)
Hailey Petersen (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/120852)
Yesterday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 17 of 22
Reply
Hello Quinteria,
Your viewpoint highlights the tension between protecting individual
rights and considering potential consequences, such as retaliation
against Ama's family. Dr. Cameron's stance is grounded in her
commitment to upholding patient autonomy and safeguarding
against coercion. Reporting suspicious actions aligns with her duty to
advocate for the well-being and rights of her patients.
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/71694)
Tatiana Johnson (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/71694)
Yesterday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 18 of 22
Reply
A Sitibi woman, Ama signed a consent form, giving Dr. Cameron
permission to retract blood from her and give it to President Dibala.
President Dibala's reason for this is that it's more effective for someone
who has the antibodies that recovered from Lassa fever than Ribavairin.
Dr. Cameron refuses to do the procedure because she feels Ama is being
threatened to give her blood for the sake of her family's life. Dr. Cuddy
approves the procedure because it has been legally accepted and she
would rather have a blood transfusion safely coerced than the death of
her family members.
President Dibala boldly admitted his hatred for the Sitibi people because
of the lives they had taken twenty years ago in his country. He also fears
that they would "happily do it again" and he wants to impose order by
preventing the cause of a Sitibi rebellion by striking fear and command
into their lives. Ethically speaking Dr. Cameron was right for denying the
blood transfusion but in the hospital, doctors deal with the battle of law
and morals. For example a Do-Not-Intubate (DNI) order form that
patients sign. Doctors have to put their morals aside when dealing with
certain situations because, in the end, it is all up to the patient on how
they would like to proceed with the care of their health.
Dr. Cameron was ethnically right because she put her moral principles
before her duty as a physician. She knew that it was wrong for President
Dibala to threaten Ama to give her blood and she was willing to risk her
job over her integrity. Dr. Cuddy also knew that it was wrong but after
consulting with one another Dr. Cameron realized Dr. Cuddy had a valid
point to rather proceed with a procedure that could be safely evaluated
than get her family killed over what she believed was right and what was
wrong.
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 19 of 22
(https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/120852)
Hailey Petersen (https://canvas.fscj.edu/courses/72848/users/120852)
Yesterday
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 20 of 22
Reply
In the episode, The Tyrant, Dr. Cuddy makes a decision about a Sitibi
woman who is brought into the hospital and is told to donate blood to
president Dibala. Everyone is under the assumption that the president
has "Lassa Fever", the Sitibi woman, Ama, recovered from Lassa Fever
two years ago and plasma from her blood has the antibodies to help
him.
Dr. Cameron is presented with a consent form from Ama and Ama giving
verbal consent. She brings it up to Dr. Cuddy saying that she refuses to
take Ama's blood but is overruled by Dr. Cuddy. Dr. Cameron sees signs
of discomfort and pleading in Ama's eyes, making her believe that
coercion is involved. In this situation it's hard to tell ethically correct, Dr.
Cuddy may have considered the overall well-being and best interests of
the patient, along with other factors such as limited resources or legal
obligations. On the other hand, Dr. Cameron's appeal suggests that she
believes the decision may be compromising the patient's autonomy or
violating her rights. However, I believe Dr. Cuddy is more ethically correct
in the situation.
Dr. Cuddy is a woman who puts her patients care and well-being first. She
also tries to avoid conflict, she mentions, "I'd rather have a needle prick
on my subconscious than the death of her family members," when talking
with Dr. Cameron about Ama. In other words, she rather keep president
Dibala happy and prevent any harm that may come to Ama's family by
just having Ama donate her blood. Denying treatment to Dibala would be
a violation of medical ethics and the duty of care, and coming from
someone like Dr. Cuddy who prioritizes medical ethics and the principle
of beneficence, puts care over comfort.
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 21 of 22
7/10/23, 1:25 AM Page 22 of 22