Case #1
The ethical issue in case #1 is concerned with consent and autonomy. Since the patient is currently incapacitated and unable to give consent, the law requires that a surrogate be used to provide consent and act on his behalf. In this case, the surrogate is the man’s wife, Sue, who provided a copy of John’s advance directive as consent to remove the mechanical ventilation. Thus, the problem facing the residents is whether they remove the mechanical ventilation that is keeping John alive. This case has three alternatives. First, the residents could obey the wishes of the patient by removing the mechanical ventilation, given through the advance directive, which was provided by his wife. Even though the removal of mechanical ventilation …show more content…
Due to Betsy’s position in being overwhelmed with three children, she is looking to abort her newly conceived baby. Despite Betsy being pro-life, her decision to abort is dependent on her prenatal diagnosis. After Betsy finds out her baby will have Down’s Syndrome, her choice to abort the baby creates an ethical dilemma for physicians because the father remains pro-life. Therefore, the problem that arises is whether the physicians should respect Betsy’s autonomy, and abort the baby. This case has two options. The first option is to respect Betsy’s right to autonomy, and abort the baby. This option aligns with Thomas and Waluchow’s argument on bodily integrity, where "no one has the right to tell a woman what is to be done with her own body” (Thomas and Waluchow, 152). Since there are currently no laws outlawing abortion in Canada, this serves as a personal issue, rather than a legal issue, which should only consider the morality of the decision (Sumner 362). Therefore, in choosing this option, one would find a women’s liberty to morally outweigh any right to life an unborn child might
The ethical issue in case #1 is concerned with consent and autonomy. Since the patient is currently incapacitated and unable to give consent, the law requires that a surrogate be used to provide consent and act on his behalf. In this case, the surrogate is the man’s wife, Sue, who provided a copy of John’s advance directive as consent to remove the mechanical ventilation. Thus, the problem facing the residents is whether they remove the mechanical ventilation that is keeping John alive. This case has three alternatives. First, the residents could obey the wishes of the patient by removing the mechanical ventilation, given through the advance directive, which was provided by his wife. Even though the removal of mechanical ventilation …show more content…
Due to Betsy’s position in being overwhelmed with three children, she is looking to abort her newly conceived baby. Despite Betsy being pro-life, her decision to abort is dependent on her prenatal diagnosis. After Betsy finds out her baby will have Down’s Syndrome, her choice to abort the baby creates an ethical dilemma for physicians because the father remains pro-life. Therefore, the problem that arises is whether the physicians should respect Betsy’s autonomy, and abort the baby. This case has two options. The first option is to respect Betsy’s right to autonomy, and abort the baby. This option aligns with Thomas and Waluchow’s argument on bodily integrity, where "no one has the right to tell a woman what is to be done with her own body” (Thomas and Waluchow, 152). Since there are currently no laws outlawing abortion in Canada, this serves as a personal issue, rather than a legal issue, which should only consider the morality of the decision (Sumner 362). Therefore, in choosing this option, one would find a women’s liberty to morally outweigh any right to life an unborn child might