“You have cancer.” These are the words that struck open the 2001 HBO adaptation of Margaret Edson’s Pulitzer Prize-winning stage play about death and dying entitled, Wit. In this play, Margaret Edson powerfully exemplified what makes life worth living through the character’s exploration of one of the most unifying experiences in human race—mortality, while she also examines the vital importance of human relationships (Larson, 2015). Many medical flicks presented how the health care providers struggle to either find a cure or increase their proficiency and motivation to care for their patients, however, the interesting and unique thing about this movie is its depiction of the other side of the usual medical drama plot. Wit is not solely a story
…show more content…
Vivian Bearing as she goes on her final months of life in a rigorous, and often painful experimental treatment for her illness which is Stage IV metastatic ovarian cancer. Throughout the film, the story unfolded like a diary as Vivian speaks directly to the camera and shares her feelings, observations, and memories regarding her past life. In this movie, I’ve observed certain issues that tested how sensitive and prudent I am as a health care provider. First, ever since the doctor diagnosed Dr. Bearing I’ve noticed that, he rarely showed empathy to her. Though he thoroughly explained her terminal condition and the treatment which is her only chance for survival, he disregarded her dignity as a person when he said that she will be of great contribution to their (researchers) knowledge. It’s as if she was being treated as a lab rat to be experimented on and not a human being. In relation to the previously mentioned statement before, thought he informed her regarding the treatment that they will be doing to her, he still violated various ethical principles such as the principle of informed consent, veracity, truthful/professional communication, autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and the principle of …show more content…
As her doctor, he was obligated to disclose all necessary information to the patient in order for her to comprehend her diagnosis and make decisions better for her treatment. Most especially, since she was being ask to participate in an experimental treatment that cannot guarantee remedy. Next, as healthcare professionals we know that our primary duty is to actively do good for the patients. Still, in this movie, though the doctors wanted to find a cure for patients with the same type of cancer as Dr. Bearing have, they’ve neglected their duty to do good for their own client which is Dr. Bearing herself. They have focused more on testing how well a full dose of chemotherapeutic drug reduces the tumor, instead of wondering how they could make Dr. Bearing’s final days of life be more comforting and moral. They’ve neglected her basic right to receive palliative treatment and also her right to receive quality care. Furthermore, we as healthcare providers took an oath (the Hippocratic Oath) to help the sick but never use it to injure them or wrong them. However, in this film, the doctors tried to push Dr. Bearing to her limits. Though she has been tough all throughout her therapy, they’ve neglected her feelings as a person to feel hurt just to be in touch with their plan of experiment. They’ve neglected
Vivian Bearing as she goes on her final months of life in a rigorous, and often painful experimental treatment for her illness which is Stage IV metastatic ovarian cancer. Throughout the film, the story unfolded like a diary as Vivian speaks directly to the camera and shares her feelings, observations, and memories regarding her past life. In this movie, I’ve observed certain issues that tested how sensitive and prudent I am as a health care provider. First, ever since the doctor diagnosed Dr. Bearing I’ve noticed that, he rarely showed empathy to her. Though he thoroughly explained her terminal condition and the treatment which is her only chance for survival, he disregarded her dignity as a person when he said that she will be of great contribution to their (researchers) knowledge. It’s as if she was being treated as a lab rat to be experimented on and not a human being. In relation to the previously mentioned statement before, thought he informed her regarding the treatment that they will be doing to her, he still violated various ethical principles such as the principle of informed consent, veracity, truthful/professional communication, autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and the principle of …show more content…
As her doctor, he was obligated to disclose all necessary information to the patient in order for her to comprehend her diagnosis and make decisions better for her treatment. Most especially, since she was being ask to participate in an experimental treatment that cannot guarantee remedy. Next, as healthcare professionals we know that our primary duty is to actively do good for the patients. Still, in this movie, though the doctors wanted to find a cure for patients with the same type of cancer as Dr. Bearing have, they’ve neglected their duty to do good for their own client which is Dr. Bearing herself. They have focused more on testing how well a full dose of chemotherapeutic drug reduces the tumor, instead of wondering how they could make Dr. Bearing’s final days of life be more comforting and moral. They’ve neglected her basic right to receive palliative treatment and also her right to receive quality care. Furthermore, we as healthcare providers took an oath (the Hippocratic Oath) to help the sick but never use it to injure them or wrong them. However, in this film, the doctors tried to push Dr. Bearing to her limits. Though she has been tough all throughout her therapy, they’ve neglected her feelings as a person to feel hurt just to be in touch with their plan of experiment. They’ve neglected