As we all are aware, recent changes in the health care industry mean that we faced with challenges. Topmost of these challenges are that our clinic must reduce the number of people it serves, the services it offers, or both. I have heard a lot of underground murmurs, with the most concerning being the immigration status of our patients and how it affects the care we provide to them. However, I wish to remind you of two ethical principles behind our medical oath. These principles include beneficence and justice. Beneficence is the desire to do good, and it encompasses the core principle of patient advocacy (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). It is often based on different factors which include our training and abilities, the socioeconomic background
…show more content…
These benefits such as health care are often competitive (Loy, 2016). Beauchamp & Childress (2013) proposed a system which would provide low-cost health care based on a fair and functional standard for the people. Through education, we present to people the benefits of healthy living, and in order to avoid waste of resources, we can use the baseline of the patients and encourage them to remain within certain parameters to receive the low-cost care. These parameters can be maintained if they avoid vices such as fast food and smoking and adhere to the guidelines of the education provided. Also, a limit can be placed on the number of visits to the clinic per month for each member of the community with the proviso that it can roll over monthly to be used twice in a year for other services that they could not afford initially such as new glasses, new walking aides, and/or oxygen tanks, etc. Likewise, we can run a ballot system for all patients who have remained within their parameters and award a free comprehensive health care for two patients at the end of the year. This would motivate the patients to take better care of their health and thus limit cost and unnecessary waste of …show more content…
According to Beauchamp & Childress (2013), rationing health care costs and improvising with incentives can lead to a compromise. They will argue that before the compromise is reached, these rations and incentives will compromise the goal of universal access to health care (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). However, I would like to remind them that the journey of a thousand miles begins with a step. The government has already cut our budget, and the current standard of care cannot be maintained by the community we serve, machines will become obsolete, and we have to lay off staff which will bring undue hardship to members of the community who currently work in our clinic. We will be violating the principle of nonmaleficence which states, “one ought not to inflict evil or harm” (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). Violation of this principle is based on the fact that they are willing to turn patients away and thus imposing harm by not acting within their scope of practice. It can also be construed as being negligent (Loy,
These benefits such as health care are often competitive (Loy, 2016). Beauchamp & Childress (2013) proposed a system which would provide low-cost health care based on a fair and functional standard for the people. Through education, we present to people the benefits of healthy living, and in order to avoid waste of resources, we can use the baseline of the patients and encourage them to remain within certain parameters to receive the low-cost care. These parameters can be maintained if they avoid vices such as fast food and smoking and adhere to the guidelines of the education provided. Also, a limit can be placed on the number of visits to the clinic per month for each member of the community with the proviso that it can roll over monthly to be used twice in a year for other services that they could not afford initially such as new glasses, new walking aides, and/or oxygen tanks, etc. Likewise, we can run a ballot system for all patients who have remained within their parameters and award a free comprehensive health care for two patients at the end of the year. This would motivate the patients to take better care of their health and thus limit cost and unnecessary waste of …show more content…
According to Beauchamp & Childress (2013), rationing health care costs and improvising with incentives can lead to a compromise. They will argue that before the compromise is reached, these rations and incentives will compromise the goal of universal access to health care (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). However, I would like to remind them that the journey of a thousand miles begins with a step. The government has already cut our budget, and the current standard of care cannot be maintained by the community we serve, machines will become obsolete, and we have to lay off staff which will bring undue hardship to members of the community who currently work in our clinic. We will be violating the principle of nonmaleficence which states, “one ought not to inflict evil or harm” (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). Violation of this principle is based on the fact that they are willing to turn patients away and thus imposing harm by not acting within their scope of practice. It can also be construed as being negligent (Loy,