There are many ethical dilemmas that health care professionals and their patients go through. The following dilemma will be in regards to a case study about a baby named Thomas. Thomas was born prematurely and immediately transferred to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) for a selection of measures to help him stay alive including actions for adequate cerebral perfusion and cardio- respiratory function. After 52 days in NICU, Thomas has had poor response to his treatment and while his parents wish for him to continue with treatment and management, the head of the ICU and Anaesthesia ward is ordering removal of life support actions and treatment due to the cost and the evidence that Thomas will likely not survive. Nurses are concerned that
…show more content…
Ethical theories which are relevant to this case study are the theories of utilitarianism and Preference Utilitarianism. These theories can be provided in defence of both sides of the ethical dilemma. Utilitarianism is the theory that the result is the most important and that when deciding what to do, the consequences are the upmost priority. When all the choses and results are laid out, choose the one that has the best outcome (Bykvist, 2009). The dilemma with this in this scenario is deciding whether the best outcome would be for Thomas and his parents or the health care professional staff. By applying utilitarianism and deciding that the best outcome would be to keep Thomas on methods of life support, we are disregarding why the hospital wants to take him off it in the first place. Although it might seem crass to say that it costs too much, by using $3,000 a day to keep Thomas alive, the hospital must lower the budget elsewhere which could affect someone else’s life or many people in fact who are also in NICU. By reversing the ethical theory and applying it so that the hospital has the best outcome, what little chance Thomas had of living will diminish. This is similar in Preference utilitarianism in which a morally right action is chosen by having the most favourable outcomes of everyone involved. This extension of utilitarianism considers both Thomas and his parents as well as the health care professionals and can be considered to produce an outcome that if favourable for both parties. This is far better in this scenario than theories such as Kantianism which only considers the science and reason behind the action and ignores the emotion that is present in the situation (Australian Catholic University, 2016, ethical theories). Principlism simplifies the approach to bioethics for easier analysis. Beauchamp and Childress created a set of principles to aid in the
Ethical theories which are relevant to this case study are the theories of utilitarianism and Preference Utilitarianism. These theories can be provided in defence of both sides of the ethical dilemma. Utilitarianism is the theory that the result is the most important and that when deciding what to do, the consequences are the upmost priority. When all the choses and results are laid out, choose the one that has the best outcome (Bykvist, 2009). The dilemma with this in this scenario is deciding whether the best outcome would be for Thomas and his parents or the health care professional staff. By applying utilitarianism and deciding that the best outcome would be to keep Thomas on methods of life support, we are disregarding why the hospital wants to take him off it in the first place. Although it might seem crass to say that it costs too much, by using $3,000 a day to keep Thomas alive, the hospital must lower the budget elsewhere which could affect someone else’s life or many people in fact who are also in NICU. By reversing the ethical theory and applying it so that the hospital has the best outcome, what little chance Thomas had of living will diminish. This is similar in Preference utilitarianism in which a morally right action is chosen by having the most favourable outcomes of everyone involved. This extension of utilitarianism considers both Thomas and his parents as well as the health care professionals and can be considered to produce an outcome that if favourable for both parties. This is far better in this scenario than theories such as Kantianism which only considers the science and reason behind the action and ignores the emotion that is present in the situation (Australian Catholic University, 2016, ethical theories). Principlism simplifies the approach to bioethics for easier analysis. Beauchamp and Childress created a set of principles to aid in the