Question

A 10-year-old girl suffered from a rare malignancy in her brain and around her spinal cord. She had surgery, and most of the tumor mass was removed, but residual tumor remained in the brain and around the spinal cord. The girl's doctors informed her parents that chemotherapy and radiation were possible treatment options but could cause serious problems such as sepsis, a permanent loss of IQ and stature, and even death. The parents wished to proceed with the therapy. While their child was undergoing aggressive chemotherapy and radiation, the parents did independent research and read of several drugs being administered for cancer in other states that were unapproved by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and were illegal in their home state but were touted by physicians using them as "miracle cures." The couple sued their child's physician fr failure t disclose alternative treatment, thus depriving them o informed consent. A court awarded summary judgement to the physician.

35. In your opinion, does the court's decision seem warranted ? why or why not?

36. Did the physician involved follow the law? Did he or she act ethically ? Explain your answer.

37. Under the doctrine of informed consent, should a physician be responsible for informing patients of all treatment options, even if some of the treatments are illegal or not yet proven effective? explain your answer.

Answer 1

Answer: The summary judgment was awarded summary judgment to the physician as the summary judgment includes the summary of judgment. The summary of judgment occurs before the completion of full trial. The summary judgment seems to be financial for both the candidates as this will immensely decrease the long procedures of the trails. So, it could be the better option in this case.