Part 1
Healthcare managers’ ethical decisions depend on their values. These values influence perceptions, priorities, and complex decision-making. Personal values about health, quality of life, and risk tolerance can influence the decision to have a double or single mastectomy.
A breast cancer survivor’s healthcare management confronting this dilemma may have different values due to their disease. Despite aesthetic or functional issues, the manager may choose a double mastectomy to prolong life and reduce cancer risk. If the manager prioritizes body image and minimally invasive procedures, they may choose a single mastectomy, accepting a higher chance of recurrence.
Personal values, based on experiences and beliefs, govern ethical decision-making. They guide patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice, resulting in a decision that meets the manager’s ethical standards and the patient’s best interests.
Values and ethics can vary according to personal experiences, cultural influences, education, and new perspectives. A double mastectomy may change body image, health priorities, and resilience values in the breast cancer choice. If post-surgery difficulties like infections or mobility issues emerge, the individual’s views about physical health and body resilience may change. Healthcare experts, support groups, and alternative treatment choices may also affect decision-making beliefs and ethics.
Part 2
I disagree with the rationale given by the student who took a book from the bookstore. While tuition can be high, stealing is not a valid way to avenge wrongs. Stealing undermines honesty, integrity, and property rights.
Advise students that committing theft might harm their integrity and lead to legal ramifications that could affect their academic and professional future. Instead, I would advise students to discuss excessive textbook charges with the school administration, seek financial aid, or use library copies or online resources.
The ethical values of autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence and justice from this week’s readings inform my reaction to the student’s rationalization (Ames Dhai & David Jan Mcquoid-Mason, 2020). Even in difficult situations, these ideals emphasize integrity and honouring others’ rights and property.
Part 3
Dr. M. made the obvious mistake of not following patient examination hygiene guidelines. In particular, he did not change gloves between inspecting Sarah’s acute bone infection and Jacob’s incision-site leg. This infection management failure certainly transmitted infection from Sarah’s case to Jacob’s, causing a huge abscess on Jacob’s leg.
Jacob and his parents did not cause his condition in any way. They dutifully followed Dr. M.’s wound care and follow-up advice. Dr. M.’s poor cleanliness during medical exams certainly caused the infection.
To avoid this incident, Dr. M. should have followed infection control protocols, including changing gloves between patient exams and keeping the surroundings sterile. He should have also acknowledged Sarah’s critical condition and taken cross-contamination measures. Jacob and his parents may have asked Dr. M. to change gloves before inspecting Jacob’s leg, but the doctor is responsible for hygiene. Regular infection control audits in the medical facility could also discover and fix protocol violations before they effect or damage patients.
References
Ames Dhai, & David Jan Mcquoid-Mason. (2020). Bioethics, human rights and health law: principles and practice. Cape Town: Juta.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
