Foregoing Curative Medical Treatment Due to Religious Beliefs
Order Instructions:
Select one of the following ethical issues in healthcare:
Foregoing curative medical treatment due to religious beliefs
Use the CSU Global Library and select Internet sources to conduct research on your chosen topic. Based on your research, provide the history of the issue from a legal, ethical, and moral perspective. In your paper address the following questions:
Do the consequences of actions always direct what is morally required?
What should happen when two principles come into conflict? For example, should patient autonomy be considered more important than beneficence? Defend your position.
Are moral and ethically rules always binding, or are they only guidelines to be assessed in each case? Defend your position.
Your paper should be 10-12 pages in length, well-written, and formatted per CSU-Global specifications for APA Style. Support your analysis by referencing and citing at least six (6) credible, peer-reviewed sources other than the course textbook (Ethics in Health Administration: A Practical Approach for Decision Makers, 2nd ed, by Eileen E. Morrison).
SAMPLE ANSWER
Foregoing Curative Medical Treatment Due to Religious Beliefs
Introduction
Healthcare professionals frequently find themselves in dilemmas as they undertake their chores at the workplace, with some directly confronting the ethical issues while others turning away. Usually, the moral courage that one possesses is what matters most as it, more often than not, helps the practitioners in addressing the various ethical issues that may present themselves; which could even involve doing something otherwise considered wrong. Inasmuch as there usually are predetermined courses of action considered ethically moral or otherwise, the consequences of the course of the action taken is what really matters (Stewart, Adams, Stewart, & Nelson, 2013). Because of this, an action that is otherwise not acceptable may have to be carried out in order to get to achieve a desirable consequence; for instance, according to most religious doctrines, abortion is not acceptable, even the conscience of the individual that may be involved may not allow it. However, if done for the sake of good will remains morally binding, for instance, the case of complications in pregnancy.
In order for us to get to understand the implications of the ethical issues pertinent with the health care practice, there is the need to understand the definition of nursing by the International Council of Nurses (ICN). Under it, the profession is defined as: “Nursing encompasses autonomous and collaborative care and communities of all ages, groups, families and communities, sick or well and in all settings. Nursing includes the promotion of health, prevention f illness and the care of ill, disabled, and the dying people. Advocacy, promotion of safe environment, research, participation in shaping the health policy and in patient and health systems management, and education are also key nursing roles.” (ICN, 2011). As outlined by Morrison (2011), the definition incorporates the three fundamental components of bioethics. It is, thus, conceivable to say that the health practitioners have the obligation of developing a well-founded ground of ethical understanding with regards to the protection of the people; which is their sole duty.
Moral Courage
The ability of one to make the right decisions in such situations that involve moral and ethical issues is what is called moral courage. According to Day (2007), moral courage is “a trait displayed by individuals, who, despite adversity and personal risks, decide to act upon their ethical values to help others during difficult ethical dilemmas. As Hall (2014) asserts, such individuals tend to strive to see to it that the only do what is right, even in cases whereby most are expected to choose least ethical behavior, which could even be not taking any action.
Conflict of Principles
Religious, spiritual and cultural beliefs and practices remain very crucial in the lives of most patients, yet most health practitioners usually find themselves at the dilemma of whether to, how and when to address such issues when dealing with patients. In the past, the physicians were basically trained on the various ways of diagnosing and treating the various diseases, but with very little or no training on the spiritual approach to the ordeal. Besides, the professional ethics allows the professionals no chance of impinging their personal beliefs on their patients who are usually very vulnerable (Brierley, Linthicum, & Petros, 2013). The matter is even complicated further by the characteristic nature of most nations of religious pluralism, having a wide range of systems of beliefs: agnosticism, atheism to the very many religious assortments. Because of this, it tends to be very difficult getting to fully understand the religious beliefs of all the patients from all walks of life.
The very first temptation that would prove worthwhile in this case is for the professionals to fully avoid the doctor patient interactions with respect to their spiritual or religious beliefs. This simplest solution may never be the best as several studies have shown that the spiritual and cultural beliefs f various patients have been proved to be very important factors for the patients to be in a position of coping with relatively serious illnesses (McCormick et al, 2012). McCormick et al (2012), assert that the engagement of the spiritual beliefs of the patients in their healing process may be devised by the health practitioners through comparison of their own beliefs against those of the patients.
Case Scenario: Foregoing Curative Drugs due to Religious Beliefs
In some communities, there is too much belief in the traditional practices that accepting the modern medicines becomes very difficult. Such communities have a belief system in which they believe and may recognize the move towards accepting the western medicine as evil. In such a case, the patient may never be taken to the hospital, or worse still, after getting to the hospital refuse to take the prescribed medicine on the belief that it is against the doctrines of their religion. The most common cases, include, but not limited to; blood transfusion, abortion, taking of family planning pills and even the normal tablets.
Conflict in Principles
In case of the principles coming into conflict, there usually is the need to be very flexible as there are so many ways in which the situations may present themselves. For effective resolution of such conflicts, the ethical and professional principles, rather than the personal preconceived ideas, should always form the pillar for the effective decision making when it comes to ethics (ANA, 2011). The ethical behavior of nurses is usually guided by a set of principles contained in the American Nurses Association (ANA) Code of Ethics of Nurses (2001). It is expected of all the nurses that they uphold all the principles in the course of their practice of professional nursing, while, at the same time, the Cord of Ethics for Nurses encourages them to ensure consistency with their personal values. There is also emphasis on the need to hold open discussion with regards to conflicting ethical principles in such a manner that all the principles are placed at the same level and treated equally.
Autonomy versus Beneficence
Autonomy
Autonomy refers to the personal self-rule that is both free from controlling such interferences that may result from others and the personal imitations that my put meaningful choices at jeopardy. In the health care, autonomy forms one of the key guidelines for the clinical ethics. A point that must be noted is that when speaking of autonomy, it does not merely imply leaving the patients the freedom of making their own choices. Rather, the health practitioners are under an obligation to see to it that they create the conditions that provide room for the independent choices, thought under some guidance. The respects for autonomy scenarios include giving room for autonomous choices as well as respecting the right to self-determination of an individual.
It must be noted that the doctors are usually visited by the people because they may not be equipped with the necessary information or background necessary for the making of informed choices. Hence, it is the physicians that educate the patients in order for them to adequately understand the situations, including; addressing the fears and emotions that may interfere with the decision making ability of the patients. Confidentiality is another form of autonomy very crucial in administering the treatment to the patients.
Beneficence
Usually, this is an action done purely for the benefit of others through either removing harm or simply by improving their situations. Apart from being refrained from causing harm, the health practitioners are expected to see to it that they help the patients. Due to the nature of the relationship inherent between the patients and the physicians, the doctors have the obligation removing or preventing harm and balancing and weighing the possible risks against the possible benefits of any action.
Balancing of autonomy and beneficence
Amongst the most difficult and common ethical issues to tackle comes in when the patient’s autonomous decision comes into conflict with the beneficent duty of the physician, which is mainly looking after the best interest of the patient. For instance, a patient who has very strict religious background may refuse to take medicine, simply because they believe in spiritual healing. This may be so challenging, especially when the physician has successfully diagnosed the ailment and knows its cause well, hence, its prescription (ANA, 2011). At such a point, the physician may be under the challenge of whether to maintain the autonomy of the patient or take a beneficence action, which will violate the autonomous requirement of the patient. More often than not, the two are equally important, however, beneficence comes first as it is a matter of life and death.
Basically, the modern biomedical ethics are grounded on four principles, which balance categorical Imperative of Emmanuel Kant: you must always do the right thing no matter what it takes, and Utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill and Jeremy: make the best decision for everyone all around. When in combination, the principles are usually called Principalism.
Respect for autonomy: giving priority to the informed choices of the patient. This theory asserts that the practitioners need to see to it that the wishes of the patients are taken into consideration. As such, the wish by a patient to have a kind of special attention with regards to choice of the health care services administered should solely depend on the patient’s wish.
Non-malfeasance: do no harm
Beneficence: do what is best for the patient, regardless of their consent. This principle asserts that the consent of the patient may be overlooked in order to see to it that the course of action is for their own good. With this, the health care practitioners are expected to ensure the good of the patients even if it means doing what they don’t wish for. The ultimate consideration of the morality will lie in the consequences, and at times, even if a patient requested for the end not to have blood transfusion due to religious beliefs, they may eventually end up thanking the physician, rather than suing them (Morrison, 2011).
Justice: always balancing the social and individual costs, risks and benefits. The physician has the obligation of seeing to it that they properly advise the patients with respect to the possible risks involved to ensure they are well informed before getting to a medical ordeal.
Morals and Ethics
Most of the moral dilemmas that tend to arise in medicine are usually analyzed using the four aforementioned principles but with some consideration given to the resultant consequences, though the frameworks may have limitations. The judgment of the best consequences is not always clear, and din case the principles conflict, the ease of deciding on the best dominant is always very hard. Virtue ethics usually focuses on the nature of the moral agent rather than how right the course of action taken is. Usually, as a practitioner, the ethical principles, which guide what action to be taken do not usually take into account the moral agent’s nature (Cordella, 2012). To look into how binding the morals usually are, the “standard” Jehovah’s Witness case may be used.
A very competent adult believer loses too much blood due to bleeding in a vessel in an acute duodenal ulcer, and the only best chances of saving his life is by having a blood transfusion together with some operation done on him. In exercising his autonomous decision, the patient requests for surgery and treatment with the best non-blood products available, and refuses blood transfusion. He even accepts the risks that are pertinent with surgery without blood transfusion.
It is very important for the health practitioners to get to distinguish between morality and legally binding courses of actions as an action may be legal but not moral and vice versa. For instance, the resuscitation of a dying patient may be considered legal, but not moral. On the other hand, when a patient falls too sick at home, it may be moral to over speed to the hospital but illegal. Also, the physicians have the obligation of distinguishing between religion and morality. From instance, some of the religions believe in circumcising women while others recognize it as a sin.
Moral Frameworks
However, the moral theories tend to provide different frameworks upon which the nurses may be able to get clarification as well as view the patients’ disturbing situations. Widely used and applicable are three frameworks that may guide the physicians. The three basic broad categories of the moral frameworks are: virtue theory, deontological and utilitarianism theory.
Virtue theory
This theory exclusively probes the human morality. It gives very little attention to the regulations that people need to adhere to; rather, it puts more emphasis on what is deemed necessary in development of human characteristics considered as good, just like living a generous and kind life.
Deontological ethics
These are usually associated with the ethical and moral standards in the execution of the professional duties by the health professionals.
Utilitarianism theory
This is the belief that any form of action is considered as being right as long as it leads to the greatest good for larger number of people. As such, there usually is a calculation on the outcome of any particular action. As such, if a health practitioner considers an action as having high propensity of bringing good and happiness to larger number of people; it definitely is the right thing to do (Morrison, 2011). In other words, the utilitarianism tends to base its reasoning on the usefulness of the action that may make it be considered as moral or immoral; for the course of action to be considered as moral, the good outcomes have t outweigh the bad ones.
Moral principles
They are the broad and general statements of philosophical concepts that provide the foundations upon which the moral rules are founded.
The health practices usually come with too many challenges which leave the practitioners at a dilemma in more often situations than not. For instance; the debate n abortion, organ transplant, end-of-life issues, management of personal health information and the allocation of the scarce health resources. Looking into each of the aforementioned issues, it usually leaves the platform very open for the practitioner to decide what they deem right course of action to take. As put across by Elliot (2011), “Culture provides the rules or framework that guides us as we negotiate our way through our daily activities of life.” Through the assessment of the heritage of any particular patient helps the nurses to understand well how such a person relates to their surroundings, how they view health and wellness, their various ways of gaining and applying knowledge as well as any other area that may be of interest in health care provision.
Most of the nations of the world, for instance, in America, the populations are characterized by people of vast diversification in the religious, ethnic, sexual orientation and nationality. As such, the patients that visit the health centers present with themselves varied symptoms requiring medical attention, some based on illness while others grounded on the cultural and religious backgrounds of the patients.
As the patients are guided through any healthcare facilities of the dialysis unit, it is very recommended that the practitioners not only concentrate on the clinical needs, but also see to it that they identify the patient’s demographics and religious orientations amongst others. The problem very common is the avoidance of the common mistakes that greatly impact safety and quality and instead, pay too much attention on the nature of the illness and how the patient may be treated. In doing this, they are not really identifying with the patient in order to attend to them as an individual. A point that must be noted is that all patients have diversified characteristics and needs, both the clinical and non-clinical, which affects the manner in which they participate, receive and view their treatment (Morrison, 2011).
Unlike in the past when health provision was mainly limited to a particular community, mostly, where one came from, there have increasingly arisen changes due to the cultural and religious diversity. There is need for the healthcare providers to see to it that they are well conversed with all the possible cultural and religious traditions inherent in the societies within which they work. It is based on this challenge that the terminology ‘cultural competence’ came to be, whereby all the practitioners are expected to be able to work in the various cultural and geographical regions without much trouble (Cordella, 2012). This may only be so through getting to first and foremost understand the various cultures to help learn their beliefs.
A fact that all health care practitioners must come to terms with is the diversity in the religious beliefs inherent in the various cultures and people from different walks of life. The beliefs of the various patients tend to be aligned to their religious backgrounds, which may never be easy to change. Due to this, it is in order that all the professionals fully understand the possible challenges that they may expect, however, they should never let the various beliefs by such patients waver their conscious mind of making the right decisions to do good. Once a person believes in the consequence o the course f action they are about to take, they should do so without any fear.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we as health practitioners are faced everyday with caring for patients of different faiths, cultures and religions. It is important to always keep an open mind and allow yourself to try to understand the faith that our patients believe. Understanding other cultures and beliefs are critical in the healing process. In healthcare today as physicians, we need to keep an open and unbiased mind, treating everyone as equal. Through the development of proper cultural competence, we may help our patients by accepting their beliefs without abandoning our own personal customs. As health practitioners, we may not be able to change the beliefs of the various patients from the different walks of life as the populations continually get diversified, rather, there is need to remain open minded in order to accommodate the diverse beliefs. In addition, as long as we believe that the course of action that we are taking will lead to more good than bad, then the autonomous stake of the patients should always be put at stake. After all, they will eventually appreciate the results.
References
Brierley, J., Linthicum, J., &Petros, A. (2013). Should religious beliefs be allowed to stonewall a secular approach to withdrawing and withholding treatment in children?. Journal of Medical Ethics, (9). 573. doi:10.1136/medethics-2011-100104.
Conflicts between religious or spiritual beliefs and pediatric care: informed refusal, exemptions, and public funding.(2013). Pediatrics, (5), 962.
Cordella, M. (2012).Negotiating Religious Beliefs in a Medical Setting. Journal Of Religion & Health, 51(3), 837-853.
Elliot G. (2011). Cracking the cultural competency code. Canadian Nursing Home, 22(1), 27-30.
Hall, H. (2014). Faith healing: religious freedom vs. child protection: the medical ethics principle of autonomy justifies letting competent adults reject lifesaving medical care for themselves because of their religious beliefs, but it does not extend to rejecting medical care for children. Skeptical Inquirer, (4). 42.
International council of nurses, (ICN). (2011). Nursing and health professions. 2011.
Krohn E. (2013). Recovering health through Cultural Traditions. Forth World Journal, 12.
Lamparello, A. (2001). Taking God Out of the Hospital: Requiring Parents to Seek Medical Care For Their Children Regardless of Religious Belief. Texas Forum On Civil Liberties & Civil Rights, 647.
Morrison, E. E. (2011). Ethics in health administration : a practical approach for decision makers / Eileen E. Morrison. Sudbury, Mass. : Jones and Bartlett Publishers, c2011.
Stewart, W., Adams, M., Stewart, J., & Nelson, L. (2013).Review of Clinical Medicine and Religious Practice. Journal Of Religion & Health, 52(1), 91-106.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
