Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100!
Discussion: Patient’s Spiritual Needs Essay
Discussion: Patient’s Spiritual Needs Essay
In addition to the topic study materials, use the chart you completed and questions you answered in the Topic 3 about “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” as the basis for your responses in this assignment.
Answer the following questions about a patient’s spiritual needs in light of the Christian worldview.
In 200-250 words, respond to the following: Should the physician allow Mike to continue making decisions that seem to him to be irrational and harmful to James, or would that mean a disrespect of a patient’s autonomy? Explain your rationale.
In 400-450 words, respond to the following: How ought the Christian think about sickness and health? How should a Christian think about medical intervention? What should Mike as a Christian do? How should he reason about trusting God and treating James in relation to what is truly honoring the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence in James’s care?
In 200-250 words, respond to the following: How would a spiritual needs assessment help the physician assist Mike determine appropriate interventions for James and for his family or others involved in his care?
Remember to support your responses with the topic study materials.
While APA style is not required for the body of this Discussion: Patient’s Spiritual Needs Essay assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This Discussion: Patient’s Spiritual Needs Essay assignment uses a rubric. You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.
Discussion: Patient’s Spiritual Needs Essay Rubric:
1. Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed from both perspectives with a deep understanding of the complexity of the principle of autonomy. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses. 20%
2. Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed with deep understanding of the complexity of the Christian perspective, as well as with the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses. 20%
3. How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is clearly analyzed with a deep understanding of the connection between a spiritual needs assessment and providing appropriate interventions. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses. 30%
4. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. 7%
5. Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. 8%
6. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. 5%
7. All format elements are correct. 5%
8. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. 5%
There are three different parts to this paper:
· Part one deals with Mike’s decision-making capabilities.
· Part two deals with how to think issues related to sickness and health.
· Part three deals with a spiritual assessment.
Read “Doing a Culturally Sensitive Spiritual Assessment: Recognizing Spiritual Themes and Using the HOPE Questions,” by Anandarajah, from AMA Journal of Ethics(2005).
Read “End of Life and Sanctity of Life,” by Reichman, from American Medical Association Journal of Ethics, formerly Virtual Mentor (2005).
Case Study: Healing and Autonomy: Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis
Mike and Joanne are the parents of James and Samuel, identical twins born 8 years ago. James is currently suffering from acute glomerulonephritis, kidney failure. James was originally brought into the hospital for complications associated with a strep throat infection. The spread of the A streptococcus infection led to the subsequent kidney failure. James’s condition was acute enough to warrant immediate treatment. Usually cases of acute glomerulonephritis caused by strep infection tend to improve on their own or with an antibiotic. However, James also had elevated blood pressure and enough fluid buildup that required temporary dialysis to relieve.
The attending physician suggested immediate dialysis. After some time of discussion with Joanne, Mike informs the physician that they are going to forego the dialysis and place their faith in God. Mike and Joanne had been moved by a sermon their pastor had given a week ago, and also had witnessed a close friend regain mobility when she was prayed over at a healing service after a serious stroke. They thought it more prudent to take James immediately to a faith healing service instead of putting James through multiple rounds of dialysis. Yet, Mike and Joanne agreed to return to the hospital after the faith healing services later in the week, and in hopes that James would be healed by then.
Two days later the family returned and was forced to place James on dialysis, as his condition had deteriorated. Mike felt perplexed and tormented by his decision to not treat James earlier. Had he not enough faith? Was God punishing him or James? To make matters worse, James’s kidneys had deteriorated such that his dialysis was now not a temporary matter and was in need of a kidney transplant. Crushed and desperate, Mike and Joanne immediately offered to donate one of their own kidneys to James, but they were not compatible donors. Over the next few weeks, amidst daily rounds of dialysis, some of their close friends and church members also offered to donate a kidney to James. However, none of them were tissue matches.
James’s nephrologist called to schedule a private appointment with Mike and Joanne. James was stable, given the regular dialysis, but would require a kidney transplant within the year. Given the desperate situation, the nephrologist informed Mike and Joanne of a donor that was an ideal tissue match, but as of yet had not been considered—James’s brother Samuel.
Mike vacillates and struggles to decide whether he should have his other son Samuel lose a kidney or perhaps wait for God to do a miracle this time around. Perhaps this is where the real testing of his faith will come in? Mike reasons, “This time around it is a matter of life and death. What could require greater faith than that?”
Applying the Four Principles: Case Study
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.
Beneficence and Nonmaleficence
Medical indications are the clinical data that is required to diagnose a patient and the extent of severity relating the medical problem thus determining the treatment options. Beneficence indicates acting with the best intentions in mind while non-beneficence emphasizes on do not harm. The parents of James were acting in his best interests despite the medical indications that James’s conditions would get worse if not treated. They had no intention of harming him and came back when his condition did not improve.
Patient preferences refer to the expressed choice of the patient or the substitute decision maker. Autonomy emphasizes on the right of a person to make his/her own decision (Beever, 2016). James is an underage kid that is 8 years old thus cannot exercise autonomy rights. However, the parents should have consulted James before making their decision despite his age to know whether he was comfortable with their decision. The physician could hardly impact this decision but could have at least talked to the parents.
Quality of Life
Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy
Justice and Fairness
Quality of life refers to the relevant medical features of the life of a patient before and after the treatment. James condition before treatment was worse but after constantly undergoing dialysis his condition improved. However, he needs a kidney transplant to effectively address his condition and his father is thinking his brother should give him the kidney or they should rely on faith. Based on the previous encounter, the parents should first consult James and listen to his views regarding the issue. The last time they depended on their faith, the condition of James got worse, thus they should act with his best interests in mind and allow him to get a kidney transplant from his brother.
Contextual features determine the legal, social and familial setting that influences one’s medical decisions (Gillon, 2018). The faith of James’s parents that he can be healed through prayers influenced their medical decisions. They are also considering on depending on their faith instead of allowing James to have a kidney transplant from his brother. Justice and fairness emphasizes on equality. The conflict of interest came up when the ideal tissue match was identified as that of his brother. The parents therefore were willing to allow other people including themselves to donate a kidney for James but are not willing for his brother to do so.
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)
According to the Christian worldview, beneficence is the principle that is most pressing. This is because the parents are acting with the best of intentions in mind about their son. They have faith that their son will be healed through intensive prayers. They therefore prefer prayers more compared to treatment because of the faith. We cannot put a blame on them because of the deteriorating health of their son because they acted in good faith and as soon as they noticed his condition was getting worse they brought him back to the hospital.
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)
A Christian can rank the priority of the four principles in such a manner that beneficence comes first then non-maleficence followed by justice and fairness and lastly autonomy. This is because according to Christians, parents should show love to their children by acting in their best interests which is associated to the principle of autonomy. Parents should also ensure that no matter what, they should not harm their children which relates to the principle of non-maleficence (Carr, 2017). Christians are supposed to practice justice and fairness in all their encounters and experiences. Lastly, Christians should also give one another a chance to indicate they thought regarding a certain decision which is associated with the principle of autonomy.
Beever, J., & Brightman, A. O. (2016). Reflexive principlism as an effective approach for developing ethical reasoning in engineering. Science and engineering ethics, 22(1), 275-291.
Gillon, R. (2018). Principlism, virtuism, and the spirit of oneness. In Healthcare Ethics, Law and Professionalism (pp. 45-59). Routledge.
Carr, M. F., & Winslow, G. R. (2017). From conceptual to concrete. In World Religions for Healthcare Professionals (pp. 31-45). Routledge.