Bersamina
Bersamina:
1. Given Sun Hudson's case wherein hospitals refused to treat him, prompting the mother to file a case seeking that the hospital be compelled to continue treating him. The mother lost the case. What principles of bioethics may have the doctors used to support their decision to refuse further treatment? Are they justified in doing so? Is not this a violation of patient's right to health care?
2. After careful considerations of the various ethical theories/views we discussed, what “personal moral system or code” can you come up with and which you can adopt? Be sure to talk about the values, precepts/ideas, and other elements that should comprise this “personal moral system or code”. Include your conception of freedom and accountability in this given moral system and your view of what it means to be a moral individual.
Answers:
1. The entire decision of the medical institution, particularly the doctors, are fully justified, and their decision to remove the life-support and refuse treatment of Sun Hudson are justified based on the following decisions and principles:
(a) The Principle of Autonomy - according to what we have studied in class, "those who are capable of deliberation about their personal choices should be treated with respect for their capacity for self-determination," and as "for those with impaired autonomy: those who are dependent or vulnerable be afforded security against harm and abuse." As one can see, the two main stakeholders involved, Sun Hudson and the mother Hudson, are incapable of self-autonomy (Sun Hudson is a newborn and Mrs. Wanda Hudson is believed to be mentally impaired because she says that "her son is a gift from the Sun"). In that case, therefore, they ought to be given protection. A person incapable of autonomy is entitled to protection, which brings us to another bioethical principle.
(b) The Principle of Justice - The mother claims that her son is still alive and actually walking around the room when the doctors had the life support system removed. However, the veracity of this statement is doubted since evidences of the mother's incapability to think rationally are quite overwhelming. Aside from that, doctors have agreed upon that the condition of the five-month old baby is fatal---the baby will not survive without the life-support system. Therefore, the termination of the treatment is just in a sense that the continuation of it is already a FUTILE attempt and thus an unwise use of resources.
In conclusion, the act is not a violation of a patient's right to health care since the patient's life is dependent on a machine; and the act is not unethical in a sense that the stakeholders (Sun Hudson and his mother) are incapable of sound judgment and reason.
2. PERSONAL MORAL CODE
First, my moral code is primarily based on the things I learned in class and partly based on experience but largely based on what I personally regard as “right” and what I consider as “valuable.” Second, I only included the significant elements of my moral code such as freedom, accountability, choices, etc. I also included the tenets of my so called moral code.
Tenets:
A. Freedom must be governed by objective, specific and consensual laws for it to be ethical and moral.
B. In general, one must also do things in accordance to his duties and principles, but must learn when to compromise duty. (Utility is still one of my favorites)
C. I also find the old, classic golden rule (do unto others as if you were the others) the best maxim in dealing with other individuals.
From the ethical perspectives and theories studied in class, I find Kantian ethics and the Categorical Imperative the sturdiest (for lack of a better term) and the least prone to criticism, so I would like to adopt it as my own while injecting some personal touches to it. The universalizability test, as far as I am concerned, is still the best way of evaluating the general and even specific morality and “rightness” or “wrongness” of an act. The three maxims are still the most fundamentally accurate maxims.
In conclusion, I believe that I will be a follower of Kant as far as ethics and morals are concerned.
Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:40 pm