Read the case below. Then, write an essay which says whether or not YOU believe

Question

Read the case below. Then, write an essay which says whether or not YOU believe Bob Gridly should be given surgery. Describe the dilemma in terms of how two of the five principles of biomedical ethics (autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, utility and justice) conflict here. Of the two you chose, explain which principle supports doing the surgery and which principle supports not doing the surgery. Then say which of the two principles supports your view about what should be done and why you think that is the right thing to do.

            Case: Bob Gridly, a 28-year-old military veteran and now a college student, fell from his motorcycle while traveling on a street in a mid-size city near Cleveland. He was traveling only a block or two to buy beer for a party that night and had decided not to wear a helmet. He was taken to a nearby hospital, having suffered several serious injuries. At the least, the surgeon called for by the emergency department expected to amputate two fingers, and surgery would be needed to deal with internal bleeding. Bob is thoroughly combative during his examination. He aggressively asserts that he does not want any medical attention; he wants to die. He seems to think that he was in a convoy supply vehicle explosion and that three of his buddies died. At least this was what the nurses on duty think he was saying because he was not speaking clearly. Despite his apparent delusions, he sometimes seems completely articulate. At those times, he aggressively rejects any intervention at all, saying he deserves to die and that life is not worth living. Without surgery Bob faces a difficult future, probably involving death due to internal bleeding. The surgeon decides to prep Bob for surgery; he does not take seriously Bob’s rejection of intervention, thinking instead that he is incapable due to the trauma caused by his injuries.

Explanation / Answer

From the given case, I personally believe that the surgery should be given to the patient. I come to this conclusion because the patient is just 28 years old and the surgery does not impose any other life threatening challenge. Instead the surgery is life saving. Considering the biomedical ethics, the dilemma lies between autonomy and beneficence. Autonomy suggests that surgery should not be done as it is the choice of individual patient whether he wants to live or not. While beneficence suggests that the surgery should be done because there is risk that the person could die as a result of internal bleeding and surgery can help refraining that situation. Two of the ethical principles supporting surgery are beneficence and non malificence as it is in favour of positive benefit to the patient by protecting his life as death is the ultimate harm to life. Additionally I think this the right thing to do because the patient was in trauma and it might be the possible reason for rejecting to surgery. The patient was not in a state where the actual condition could be explained and the patient might hype the condition by himself and consider death as the sole option. There is no mention of any extra conditions of patient's life that can satisfy the reason that he does not want to live anymore or he can not live well by himself or any other conditions that can refrain him from living a healthy life.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse R
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.