Benchmark - Patient's Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

Medical Indications

Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

Patient Preferences

Autonomy

· James high blood pressure and excessive fluid buildup requires immediate dialysis

· James condition is deteriorating which makes it imperative to undergo a kidney transplant

· The medical practitioner shows respect to the parent’s decision. They choose to seek religious intervention instead of a medical intervention a decision. Irrespective of the gravity of James’ condition, the practitioner allows the parents to make an uninfluenced decision.

Quality of Life

Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy

Contextual Features

Justice and Fairness

· All decisions made by both parent’s and the medical practitioner are purposed to serve James’s best interest.

· The parents offer to give one kidney to James to aid his recovery.

· All the resources in the healthcare center are dedicated to treat James’s condition.

Medical practitioners are guided by strict ethical principles while practicing either research or clinical medicine. In cases of confusion health professionals can refer to the medical ethics. The ethics entail four imperative values i.e. respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. Over the past years, there has been a great conflict between the medical ethics and Christian worldview. The Christian worldview stipulates a design through which Christians should explain the world. While considering this doctrine, it is imperative for a Christian individual to have an answer for the ethical questions such as “what should I do.” In this case, Mike and Joanne action should be guided by truth, their child’s future and a best course of action according to Christianity. When the position of the parents is focused into using the medical ethics, beneficence is the most relevant principle. Autonomy implies that parents should act in the best interest of the children irrespective of the consequences (Gillon, 2018). In this case, the parent’s are responsible for making a decision on behalf of their child. Since beneficence stands for best interest, the parents were correct to choose religious intervention rather than a temporary dialysis. Social values in today’s society have changed in such a way that a medical outcome is often defined according to its relevance to the patient’s family more than the practitioners. It is clear that the ethical dilemma for the parents is to have their faith heal James, which makes them consider medical intervention as a second option. The parents had faith that James would be healed but after seeing that faith didn’t work, they considered medical intervention.

According to the Christian worldview, the four principles should be ranked in a specific way. The first principle is beneficence. Parents make decisions on behalf of their children. Therefore, the parents have the first principle is beneficence. Parents make decisions on behalf of their children. Therefore, the parents have an obligation to makes sure that their decisions serve their children’s best interests. The second principle is non-maleficence. This principle supports beneficence. The Christians should bring better than harm to their children’s welfare. When deciding on behalf of their children, parents must consider a decision that serves to bring good to their children rather than any harm. This should be the case irrespective of the moral dilemma presented by a case. The third principle is justice and fairness. It is imperative for Christian to consider a decision that is right. Christians should be just i.e. they should consider other people’s interests. The fourth principle is autonomy. It is crucial for Christians to allow others to make their personal choices. Autonomy implies that patients have the freedom of making an individual decision without being influenced (Beever & Brightman, 2016). In such cases, Christians should be willing to accept other people’s choices even if they do not favor them. As such, the Christian worldview places medical ethics in the order; beneficence, non-maleficence, justice and autonomy according to their importance to Christian doctrine.