Question

analyze the case as completely as possible. (Remember, medical indications, patient preferences, quality of life, contextual features and case analysis may be helpful ways to organize your thoughts.) We have spent a good deal of time this half-term talking about the importance of autonomy. One author has described autonomy to mean "self-rule," and it is a patient's most basic right. As such, it is a health care worker's responsibility to respect the autonomy of her patients. However, at times this can be difficult because it can conflict with the paternalistic attitude of many health care professionals. The following two cases address patient autonomy. The first involves the rights of an individual to decide her own fate, even against her physicians' judgments. The second case involves the rights of a parent to care for her child in the manner that she sees fit. Case A: A woman enters the emergency room with stomach pain. She undergoes a CT scan and is diagnosed with an abdominal aortic aneurysm, a weakening in the wall of the aorta which causes it to stretch and bulge (this is very similar to what led to John Ritter's death). The physicians inform her that the only way to fix the problem is surgically and that the chances of survival are about 50/50. They also inform her that time is of the essence, and that should the aneurysm burst, she would be dead in a few short minutes. The woman is an erotic dancer; she worries that the surgery will leave a scar that will negatively affect her work; therefore, she refuses any surgical treatment. Even after much pressure from the physicians, she adamantly refuses surgery. Feeling that the woman is not in her correct state of mind and knowing that time is of the essence, the surgeons decide to perform the procedure without consent. They anesthetize her and surgically repair the aneurysm. She survives and sues the hospital for millions of dollars. Questions for Case A: • Do you believe that the physician's actions can be justified in any way? • Is there anything else that they could have done? • Is it ever right to take away someone's autonomy? (Would a court order make the physicians' decisions ethical?) • What would you do if you were one of the health care workers?

Answer 1

Answers for Case A:

• Yes, I believe that physician's actions can be justified because the first and the ultimate role or duty of any doctor is to save the life of the patient and nothing is as precious as being alive. In this case, the physician has done his duty thinking that if he could save her life , she might earn her living through other many ways as erotic dancing is just not the only way to earn a living.
• The physician can also try to change her mind with the help of a psycologist/psychiatrist or even with the help of her close friends or family.
• No, It's not right to take away someone's autonomy, but not in all cases, as in some cases the patient might not be in a state of mind to take the right decision for him/her due to many factors (like anxiety, fear, depression etc) and we cannot stand there watching him/her to die on the name of autonomy.
• If i were one of the healthcare workers, i would try to convince her for surgery with help of a psycologist/psychiatrist or with the help of her close friends or family. If i could not do that before the surgery due to short time, then i would first apologize for what have had happened and try to explain her the situation and also try to make her realize that erotic dancing is not the only way to earn a living, there are myriad opportunities to explore, but if erotic dancing is what makes her happy, i would tell her she can continue doing that as there are many ways to conceal the scar.