Final Project – Compiled Case Studies
Janisha E. Rosa
HSC312: Ethics of Health Care
May 2015
Professor Flynn
Case Analysis: Paternalism vs. Autonomy - Dax Cowart
1. Ethical Dilemma
ISSUE: Should Dax Cowart’s physicians continue to treat him against his wishes?
2. Primary issues related to the identified dilemma health care decision making capacity; autonomy and the right to refuse treatment
3. Primary Stakeholders & Stakeholder positions
Dax Cowart: 25-year old man suffering from blindness and third-degree burns over approximately sixty-five percent of his body as a result of a vehicle explosion . Dax would like to reject treatment and be allowed to die.
Mrs. Cowart: Don’s mother who feels that her son does not really wish to die and that his condition was too serious to allow him to make decisions about whether or not to receive treatment. She signed consent forms permitting Dax’s physicians to continue treatment.
Charles Baxter: Attending physician who felt that Dax only requested to die in order to manipulate everyone and gain control of his environment (Munson, 2012). He continued to treat Dax against his wishes.
4. Potential Solution Analysis …show more content…
In the case of Dax Cowart, two different psychiatrists concluded that he was fully competent and capable of making his own decisions pertaining to his care. Therefore, he had the right to refuse treatment and his physicians violated his right to autonomy by continuing to treat him against his wishes. Although his mother gave consent for surgery and treatment, Dax’s wishes should have been honored since he had the capacity to make his own decisions and did not require anyone t do so on his
Janisha E. Rosa
HSC312: Ethics of Health Care
May 2015
Professor Flynn
Case Analysis: Paternalism vs. Autonomy - Dax Cowart
1. Ethical Dilemma
ISSUE: Should Dax Cowart’s physicians continue to treat him against his wishes?
2. Primary issues related to the identified dilemma health care decision making capacity; autonomy and the right to refuse treatment
3. Primary Stakeholders & Stakeholder positions
Dax Cowart: 25-year old man suffering from blindness and third-degree burns over approximately sixty-five percent of his body as a result of a vehicle explosion . Dax would like to reject treatment and be allowed to die.
Mrs. Cowart: Don’s mother who feels that her son does not really wish to die and that his condition was too serious to allow him to make decisions about whether or not to receive treatment. She signed consent forms permitting Dax’s physicians to continue treatment.
Charles Baxter: Attending physician who felt that Dax only requested to die in order to manipulate everyone and gain control of his environment (Munson, 2012). He continued to treat Dax against his wishes.
4. Potential Solution Analysis …show more content…
In the case of Dax Cowart, two different psychiatrists concluded that he was fully competent and capable of making his own decisions pertaining to his care. Therefore, he had the right to refuse treatment and his physicians violated his right to autonomy by continuing to treat him against his wishes. Although his mother gave consent for surgery and treatment, Dax’s wishes should have been honored since he had the capacity to make his own decisions and did not require anyone t do so on his