Nursing ethics and law
Name
Institution’s name
The case scenario involving Jazi, a patient admitted in ICU, depicts a number of both legal and ethical issues. The fact that Jazi was not involved in the decision making process regarding his treatment option has resulted to professional and moral questions on whether it was right or wrong. Inherently, this paper identifies the ethical and legal issues that results from the actions of the nurses, and the doctor with regard to Jazi condition.
Legal issues
Legal Issues | Facts supporting / refuting | Further information which needs consideration |
* NFR directive | * Nurses should have worked on the verbal order | * Why did ...view middle of the document...
|
Inherently, according to the professional nursing standards, the patients are supposed to be involved in the decision making regarding their treatment preferences. However, in this case, it is evident that neither the patient nor his relatives were included in the decision making regarding the treatment of Jazi (Code of Ethics for Nurses in Australia, 2008). Moreover, the professional nursing standards also call for nurses to advise their supervisors together with employers, in good faith, the scopes (Vernon, Papps & Dignam, 2012).
The main stake holders in the case include Jazi, hospital, doctors, pat and the nurses. Inherently, Jazi has a desire to receive quality treatment, get well and go home to his wife. Actually, to Jazi, getting well was paramount since his wife was also sick and has been looking up to him. However, according to him and Pat, he was not receiving the expected treatment options. Failure of proper treatment may result to death and this will also have detrimental effects to his wife. Consequently, Jazi’s condition was legitimate, that is, he is free to obtain the preferred treatment option, and also it was a matter of urgency. In regard to deontological ethical theory, it is ethical for Jazi to request for his preferred treatment option owing to the fact that the desire for him to get healed was not driven by duty, but rather by his desire to contribute to the happiness of his wife (Chang & Daly, 2012). Similarly, according to utilitarianism, it would for the greater good if Jazi receives proper treatment and be released. This means that he will not use much of the hospital resources, as well as he would be in a position to assist his wife in her condition.
Additionally, the other stakeholder is Pat, a nurse who was taking of Jazi. She noted that the due procedure was not followed, and therefore, she was optimistic that there was still a chance to allow Jazi or his relatives contribute towards the decision regarding the NFR directive. Inherently, her interest was in accordance to the professional nursing standards since they were supposed to involve the patient in the decision making process (Johnstone, 2009). Hence, her actions were not only legitimate, but also they were ethical in regard to the code of conduct. Moreover, in accordance to deontological ethical theory, Pat was ethical to request for due procedures be followed even though it was not her professional duty to do so. This is because she did it out of desire for the patient well being to be put in consideration and not out of duty.
More importantly, the hospital also is part of the stakeholders in Jazi case. This is for the reason that Jazi was being treated in the hospital, and moreover, the hospital is supposed to ensure that its staff adheres to the ethical and professional standards required by their profession (Freegard, 2007). Failure to ensure this can cost the hospital if incase the patient health becomes worse. According to...
