Decision making regarding treatment vs non-treatment, Business Law and Ethics

In relation to the scenario below, discuss relevant ethical and legal issues that relate to decision making regarding treatment vs non-treatment.  

Please note, you are not being asked to take a particular viewpoint/position here, but rather to discuss key issues relevant to the scenario. This is not a discussion about pathophysiology, nor about euthanasia.

Scenario background:

Mr GB is a 67 year old male with hypertension, chronic renal failure and Type 2 diabetes. He was originally admitted to hospital following a dense cardiovascular accident (CVA or 'stroke') which has left him with unilateral weakness and aphasia (inability to speak). Four weeks later GB now has a non-functioning kidney and to survive, will need haemodialysis three times per week. His family is divided about whether he should undergo such treatment and are unable to reach agreement.

 

Using the ethical principles of beneficence/non-maleficence, discuss issues of treatment vs non-treatment relevant to the above scenario.  You could consider issues such as: 

  • futility of treatment
  • quality of life
  • the decision making process (e.g. competence and consent)
  • the law as it relates to this case study (depending on which state or territoryyou live in).

An exhaustive list of arguments is not required, rather, you should address a fewer number of points in depth.

Your arguments/discussion points should be logical and objective, and address relevant issues. To achieve this, avoid "I feel" or "I believe" statements. This is different to the Journal. Write in the third person using formal academic writing.

Referencing:

  • Your reference list should contain aminimumof eight quality references that are not more than 5-10 years old, unless you can validate the use of older sources.
  • This doesnotinclude Wikipedia or dictionaries.
  • Information gained from Internet sites varies greatly in depth and quality of content. Limit internet sites to no more than one, unless additional references are from reputable, on-line refereed journals

Writing

  • Write in the third person; avoid personal pronouns such as 'I' and 'you'.
  • Avoid long, confusing sentences and check that your tenses (past, present and future) are consistent within the same sentence.
  • Avoid posing questions; these detract from the strengths of your discussion.
  • Use plain English. It is essential you demonstrate that you understand the nature of the topic.
Posted Date: 2/19/2013 12:03:47 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Decision making regarding treatment vs non-treatment, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Decision making regarding treatment vs non-treatment, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Decision making regarding treatment vs non-treatment Discussions

Write discussion on Decision making regarding treatment vs non-treatment
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
NATURE AND CATEGORIZATION OF LAW: Here the term "law" has no consigned meaning.  It is utilized in a variety of senses.  Nonetheless different writers have bond to explain the

Non-Payment of Cheques A banker's authority about pay a cheque that will be determined or that terminated through: like; (a) Countermand of payment, below s.75 (a). the Act

Trading arrangements: From this statement, it can be inferred that, if a court held that a company acted in a particular instance as an agent of its holding company, the veil

QUESTION 1 Explain the meaning of ‘constructive dismissal' with reference to appropriate case law QUESTION 2 (a) What is the meaning of remuneration? (b) What type o

Normal 0 false false false EN-IN X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

Rights of Guarantor Against the Debtor Therefore the guarantor's rights alongside the debtor are: like; (a) Before the payment has been made, whereas to compel the debtor t

Companys debts: In case a company is unable to pay its debts the creditors, or a creditor, may petition the High Court for an order to wind it up. During the winding up the me

Scheme at meeting - reconstructions: Following approval of the scheme at meeting(s) application is made to the court for an order to approve and implement the scheme.  At this

1. Chuck walked into a room. As a joke, Matt stuck his leg out so that Chuck would trip Chuck tripped and in so doing, dropped the bottle of soda he was carrying. In the

Provisions Which Prevent Capital Going Out Of The Company: In Trevor v Whitworth (1887) Lord Watson stated: "Paid-up capital may be diminished or lost in the course of the