Mara And Sandeep Case Summary

In the case of Mara and Sandeep, what ought the medical professional in question do? If Mara goes through labor, the chances of survival is at best 12% and there is a 65% chance of severe life-long health complications. The other treatment plan is for the doctor to do a C-section. A C-section would come with a greater risk of complications and would possibly affect future pregnancies. The doctor has two options to consider, do a C-section which would increase the baby’s chances of survival by 1~2% but potentially harm the mother, or to prepare for a vaginal delivery in which the baby’s odds would not be as desirable. Mara and Sandeep expressed to the medical staff that they wanted their child resuscitated, and delivered by C-section. As a medical professional, I would respect their wishes, and go through with the procedure. …show more content…
Mara took control and made her decision based on her moral opinion and judgement. This could not be the principle of Beneficence which is the principle that we should do good to others and avoid doing harm. It would not be relevant in this instance because the medical professional in this case should not be considering what is good & beneficial but rather should be concernd about the decisions of the patient no matter the consequences. The principle of Utility states that the medical professional should aim to produce the most favorable balance of good over bad. It is irrelevant as respecting a patient’s wishes is not considering what is good and what is bad, but is interjecting his/her opinions and interfering with Mara and Sandeep’s decision. Lastly, the principle of Justice is the principle that provides fairness/equality between patients/individuals. This does not apply to Mara and Sandeep’s case as the doctor does not get to decide if this is fair/equal as he/she is allowing his/her patient to make their decisions as they see