Benchmark - Patient's Spiritual Needs: Case Analysi

		Criteria	Points	Comments
			Potential	Actual
	%	Part 1
	10%	Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence	15.00	14.21	You attempted to treat the following questions: • Is the problem acute, chronic, or critical? • What is the history, diagnosis, and prognosis? • What are the subjective and objective signs or symptoms? • What therapeutic interventions may be appropriate? • What does research suggest in terms of treatment or intervention? • What are the medical facts based on for this particular case?
	10%	Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy	15.00	14.33	You attempted to treat the following questions: • How might the problem be impacting the person in other areas of life? • How might the problem impact the person’s relationship to others? • Will the problem create any impediment if in general population? • Is there any short- or long-term health risk? • Is there any secondary implication to the original problem? • Does the problem impact identity, self-worth, or cause depression? • Is there a prejudicial bias to the assessment of what is right for the person?
	10%	Patient Preferences Autonomy	15.00	14.24	You attempted to treat the following questions: • Has the person been informed of the indications, risks, and benefits? • What are the person’s wishes for treatment, therapy, or return to normal life? • Is the person competent? • Is the problem/pain severe enough to interfere with the decision-making capacity? • Is the desire to proceed clouding the person’s judgment? • Is the person feeling pressure related to opinions or attitudes of others? • Is the person’s right to choose being respected to the extent possible?
	10%	Contextual Features Justice and Fairness	15.00	14.29	You attempted to treat the following questions: • Are there other parties who are stakeholders in the clinical decision? • What are the limits of, or imposed restrictions on, confidentiality? • What is the spouse’s attitude toward the problem or treatment plan? • What is the person’s role? • Are there religious issues that might impact treatment?
	%	Part 2
	30%	Most Significant Principle	45.00	43.17	In 274 words, you attempted to answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, which of the four principles is most pressing in this case.
	30%	Priority of Principles	45.00	42.80	In 205 words, you attempted to answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian rank the priority of the four principles.
	Total Points	150	143.01	95.3%
	Kieran, what was done well in this assignment: You expressed your thoughts well when treating Beneficence, Autonomy, Nonmaleficence, and Justice You addressed the main point for each of the four content areas. You provided good understanding of the components of the Medical Indications, Quality of Life, Patient Preferences, and the Contextual Features.
	Kieran, what might be improved in your next written assignment: You should review the grammatical rules for punctuation, sentence structure, connectives, etc., in GCU's Writing Center in the Tools in the Student Success Center: https://www.gcumedia.com/lms-resources/student-success-center/v3.1/#/tools/writing-center. There are tutorial videos explaining APA format, as well as a GCU Style Guide.

Applying the Four Principles: Case Study

1 Part 1: Chart (60 points)

Based on the “Healing and Autonomy” case study, fill out all the relevant boxes below. Provide the information by means of bullet points or a well-structured paragraph in the box. Gather as much data as possible.

Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence	Patient Preferences Autonomy
· Quick dialyses will help James to manage fluid buildup as well as high blood pressure. · James’ condition is worse, which made him to be placed on dialysis. He needs a kidney transplant in the course of the year. · The only ideal donor for James is Samuel, his brother. · A kidney transplant might save James’ life but still pose a threat to the twin brother, by undergoing surgery and remaining with just one kidney.	· The physician respected the autonomy of the patient’s parents by letting them use their faith and believe that a religious service would restore the health of their son. · Mike, the patient’s father, is faced with the issue of the possibility of Samuel donating a kidney to his twin brother. Mike has difficulties with this issue and thinks that maybe God will make a way since this is a test of their faith. · It is not clear about Joanne’s feelings towards the issue, which makes one to think how she can open up and give her opinion on the whole issue. Nothing is said regarding the choice of James and Samuel, yet they need to be allowed to say something because they are both affected.
Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy	Contextual Features Justice and Fairness
· The importance of dialyses and medical treatment is that it will help in restoring the kidney function of James, and probably save his life. However, there might be some temporary discomfort as a result of temporary dialyses ("Medical Principles", 2020). James’ renal function should get back to normal but since he did not get the treatment as a result of autonomy and his parents’ decisions to depend on faith for healing, his condition has worsened and he will need a kidney transplant. · James will have to undergo dialyses which might give him a lower quality life as a result of the transplant procedure, which needs to be monitored thrice a week and drains one physically, but within a year, James will require a kidney transplant failure to which he might lose his life. · If James gets a successful kidney transplant, his life quality will improve. Samuel will have a temporary decline in the functioning of his body since he will remain with one kidney if he undergoes surgery, and should he lose the left kidney or it gets diseased, he would require a transplant as well. · If Samuel donates one of his kidneys to James, he will be giving him a lifesaving organ and avoid losing him, which will be beneficial to both of them. Non-maleficence is seen as Mike struggles with the idea of putting his son, Samuel, through the surgery ordeal, and risk his life by surviving with one kidney.	· Joanne and Mike are faced with the decision of allowing their son Samuel to donate one kidney to James. One could wonder if this is their decision, Samuel’s, or James and Samuel’s. As per the nature of the close relationship between twins, it is better for Samuel to give one kidney to his brother rather than lose him forever. It seems like Mike’s feelings and thoughts towards this matter are taking a center stage. Should he have the right to put the life of Samuel in his faith solely? What are Joanne’s thoughts on this whole matter? · Mike is wondering if it is fair and just to put Samuel through surgery and leave him to survive with just one kidney. · Joanne’s opinion and feelings regarding the scenario of her sons is also not clearly expressed, which raises questions on justice and fairness of the situation.

©2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

2 Part 2: Evaluation

Answer each of the following questions about how principlism would be applied:

1. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, which of the four principles is most pressing in this case? Explain why. (45 points)

The principle of autonomy is the most pressing in the given scenario as per the Christian worldview. Autonomy is the ability of a patient to make choices regarding their health and medical treatment as per their values and beliefs. In this case, autonomy is demonstrated when the parents are moved by a healing sermon and decides to forego a temporary dialysis for the son, and instead present him in a faith healing service. However, this deteriorated the health of the boy and had to undergo a kidney transplant within a year. Autonomy is seen by the father of the patient struggling to make a decision if or not to allow Samuel to give his brother a kidney. This also demonstrates the principle of justice. Patient autonomy is very essential in making health decisions and the patients have a right to this autonomy. Healthcare practitioners also have the responsibility to let patients make their personal decisions regarding their treatment. If the patient is a child and can hardly make sound decisions regarding their treatment, the doctor should let the patient participate in making medical decisions depending on their ability to understand their health condition and the consequences of the undertaken decisions. Religious objection has a strong foundation in the Constitution and legal precedent. It is not easy for courts to justify when the loved ones or parents of a patient refuse treatment to be done due to religion reasons. Exemptions of spiritual treatment are normally reflective of the state with regards to the life quality. However, there are cases that the court might find that family autonomy is hardly absolute and may have various limitations.

2. In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian rank the priority of the four principles? Explain why. (45 points)

Christians would rank the four principles depending with their faith. Mostly, a Christian is likely to rank the principles in this order: Beneficence principle requires the care providers to love others and seek to benefit the people they are taking care of, which is the greatest motivation behind being in nursing field. The bible tells us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves and treat them with love. The principle of justice requires that patients be treated with equality and treatment resources to be distributed fairly. Every patient deserves treatment with similar level of care and dignity regardless of their religion or social background ("Christian and Health", 2020). Seeking justice in an unjust world is among the challenges of living a Christian life. Autonomy: In Genesis, after creating man, God gave him the freedom to make decisions by giving him commands and outlined the consequences of failing to keep the commands. God made and respected free will. It is therefore important for medical practitioners to allow the patients and their loved ones to make free choices. Non-maleficence principle accords the medical providers moral obligations to avoid causing harm to patients and constantly act for the benefit of others, rather than serving their personal interests.

3 References:

Christian and Health. (2020). Retrieved 26 April 2020, from https://www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/Medical%20Ethics%20a%20Christian%20Perspective.pdf

Medical Principles. (2020). Retrieved 26 April 2020, from https://www.apha.org/-/media/files/pdf/membergroups/ethics/ethics_brochure.ashx