Unfortunately, in this case, a life was lost that could have very easily been saved. Manuel was traumatically hurt and needed the help of a medical professional. He had a job that was willing to pay him and in that point of his life, he had not yet realized how important medical insurance was. He was focused on having a job that paid him so he was able to live. We have to decide whether a private hospital has the right to refuse any person the right to medical attention if they do not have any medical insurance. Manuel had been through a lot in his life. He grew up without a lot of money and he was constantly working for whoever would hire him. He finally found a job working with a construction company who provided him with work and money.
…show more content…
As stated in the Principle of Beneficence, “Generally, moral agents have the obligation to do good for others.” As a hospital, full of nurses and doctors, the main priority of those workers is to help patients. As a moral agent, the hospital should have accepted Manuel. He was in desperate need of medical attention and they are care providers. They could have easily saved his life by helping him in the short amount of time he had left to live rather than going without and passing away. Not only could they have helped Manuel and save his life, they also could have set up a way for him to pay them for his procedures. There were other ways to go about this situation had they put the patient first in their …show more content…
As a hospital, it is your job and main priority to take care of any patient who walks through your building doors. Manuel needed serious medical attention and his life could have been saved. Since four hospitals denied their help to a harmed individual, his life was lost. A life that should not have been lost because of the lack of medical insurance. In the case of a private hospital only helping those with medical insurance, it is selfish. They are only thinking of the money they want and not of the patients who need their care. There is more to a medical job than money. Lives are at risk, lives that matter to someone. Manuel deserved a chance to continue on with his life but was denied that opportunity when he was denied medical
As stated in the Principle of Beneficence, “Generally, moral agents have the obligation to do good for others.” As a hospital, full of nurses and doctors, the main priority of those workers is to help patients. As a moral agent, the hospital should have accepted Manuel. He was in desperate need of medical attention and they are care providers. They could have easily saved his life by helping him in the short amount of time he had left to live rather than going without and passing away. Not only could they have helped Manuel and save his life, they also could have set up a way for him to pay them for his procedures. There were other ways to go about this situation had they put the patient first in their …show more content…
As a hospital, it is your job and main priority to take care of any patient who walks through your building doors. Manuel needed serious medical attention and his life could have been saved. Since four hospitals denied their help to a harmed individual, his life was lost. A life that should not have been lost because of the lack of medical insurance. In the case of a private hospital only helping those with medical insurance, it is selfish. They are only thinking of the money they want and not of the patients who need their care. There is more to a medical job than money. Lives are at risk, lives that matter to someone. Manuel deserved a chance to continue on with his life but was denied that opportunity when he was denied medical