John Doe Ethical Dilemma

At age 79 Mr. John Doe was admitted into the hospital for having a possible stroke. He slipped into a coma and the doctors who are under oath to save lives did their job and put him on artificial living. His family knew he wanted not be on artificial living, but kept him under due to the medical team’s recommendations and four days later he died. Not only is there and ethical issue for the family, but they also have conflicting obligations that they have to decide on and doctors who aren’t supporting the right obligation.
Although MR. John Doe had told his family different, the family kept him on life support like recommended by the doctors. His chances of living seemed low and his brain was bleeding, which can further do damage on the brain after time. Meaning if Mr. John Doe was to survive he could be living a miserable life due to brain damage and his age. This must be a huge ethical dilemma for the family to decide whether to go on his wishes or there’s. John Doe …show more content…
John Doe’s wishes. The family would have saved money and not have to worry for four days straight. Mr. John Doe’s wishes would have been followed and he wouldn’t have to be in a coma for four days with bleeding. The healthcare team wouldn’t have to deal with the procedure of putting him in a ventilator, having to monitor him, giving him medication, and would have time for other patients.
In this situation I would have took Mr. John Doe off artificial life especially after I heard it was on his will. To keep someone alive when they specifically said they didn’t want to be on artificial life seems selfish. Also if Mr. John Doe did survive he could sue the hospital for not following his will. After taking him off life support I would assume the family might become sad or upset and I would recommend seeing a counselor or a physiologist to them and comfort them as much as possible before they