The Four Principles Of Medical Ethics

Actions that are right or wrong is all a matter of a difference of opinion amongst individuals. What they learn from their family, where they grew up, what institutions they attend, their religious views, and their reflection of themselves and the world around them, all influence their morals and ethical beliefs. New ideas are constantly emerging causing us to consistently review and reconsider our beliefs. One idea that emerged and caused ethical consideration is the goal of keeping ill persons alive. This first came in the nineteenth century and has since given rise to moral questions on the care for patients. The importance of a good death also became a large public topic, which lead to do not resuscitate orders and hospice care centers. …show more content…
The four principles are beneficence, non-maleficence, respect for autonomy, and justice. The principle of beneficence states healthcare professionals must act in a way that does good by a patient and actively protects the them from harm. Healthcare providers must strive to improve their patients’ health, with the understanding that what is right for one may not be for another. The principle of non-maleficence is simply medical professionals should do no intentional harm to a patient. The principle of respect for autonomy is healthcare professionals must treat the individual as humanly as possible. This allows patients to have full information about diseases they have and the treatments available to them. The main idea here is people have the privilege to manage what happens to their bodies. This entitles them to full informed consent to accept or refuse treatments. Lastly, the principle of justice states medical staff should do their best to try to be as fair as possible in regards to offering treatments and that all actions are justifiable. These four principles together are here to protect patients. Its primary role is to convey a set of norms in medicinal decision-making, which are of course limited to individuals, society, institutions, and regulations. As Thomasma states, the aim of medical ethics is to contribute to the right or good of medicinal decisions. However, following these principles is not always an easy feat. …show more content…
So what happens when there is confusion between these principles and the perception of patients? Look at tissue ownership for one example. No clear ownership interests were established when tissue research first initiated. So, who owns the specimen after removal? There are two court cases with published answers to this question concerning the usage of tissue samples for research, Moore v Regents of the University of California and Greenberg et al v Miami Children’s Hospital. In the first case, the California Supreme Court ruled individuals have no ownership rights in removed tissue used to develop new products, even if the cells initially belonged to the patient, they were distinct from the resulting product. After removal, the removed item no longer belonged to the person in which they came. In the Greenberg et al v Miami Children’s Hospital case the judge accepted the same reasoning as the California Supreme Court such that the specimen is the property of the researcher and the source had no rights to entitlement in a patent or commercial product. In fact, no state laws establish individual ownership rights in any specimen used for research; the regulations are more concerned with confidentiality of personal