Categories
Uncategorized

LWD101 Ethics, Law and Health Care

Students must:  Identify the exact number of words used in their problem-solving exercise on the first page of their assignment. Words in excess of 1600…

Students must:  Identify the exact number of words used in their problem-solving exercise on the first page of their assignment. Words in excess of 1600 words will not be read. Reference in accordance with APA (see www.citewrite.qut.edu.au for further information on this referencing style). Attach a complete reference list of sources (not included in the 1600 word limit) (see www.citewrite.qut.edu.au for information on what should be included). Referencing Cases: When referencing cases in-text, you only need to include the name of the case e.g. (Donoghue v Stevenson). In your reference list, you are required to include the full legal citation i.e. Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 (Note: If cases are referred to in textbooks, you will sometimes find the full citations in the endnotes or footnotes of the relevant chapter of that text.) Referencing Legislation: To reference legislation in-text, you need to include the name of the Act and section number e.g. (Coroners Act, s 43). In your reference list, you need to use the full legal citation i.e. Coroners Act 1958 (Qld). (Note: If legislation is referred to in textbooks, you will sometimes find the full citation in the endnotes or footnotes of the relevant chapter of that text.) Referencing the Codes: Full references must be provided for the Codes. See www.citewrite.qut.edu.au for details (APA/internet sources/document from a web page). Not attach appendices to their problem-solving exercise. Use 12 pt, Times New Roman font with 1.5 spacing.

Please note: Out of fairness to all students, members of the LWD101 teaching team are not able to review drafts of the assignment.
42-year-old Jenny Kim and her 15-year-old daughter, Jillian, have been brought by ambulance to the emergency department of a Brisbane hospital following a serious motor vehicle accident. Both patients have sustained serious head injuries and have lost a significant amount of blood. Both patients were unconscious on arrival at the hospital. The attending physician, Dr Franks, ordered that both Jenny and Jillian receive urgent blood transfusions. Shortly after the first transfusion, one of the nurses, RN Huang, checked Mrs Kim’s purse to locate details of the patient’s next of kin. RN Huang found a card in Mrs Kim’s purse with the words “No Blood” on the top. The card indicated that Mrs Kim was a Jehovah’s Witness and, as a practising Jehovah’s Witness, she was opposed to the use of all blood products for medical purposes. She also had in her bag a valid advance health directive (AHD) stating the same. The RN immediately alerted the attending physician to both Mrs Kim’s “no blood” card and her AHD and the RN emphasised that this would affect any future transfusions.
RN Huang located the contact details of Jenny’s husband, Anthony, and phoned him and explained that his wife and their daughter had been in a serious car accident and that he needed to come to the hospital immediately.
When Anthony arrived at the hospital, his wife was in a serious but stable condition, following the blood transfusion. Unfortunately, Jenny’s condition started to deteriorate rapidly and Dr Franks advised Anthony that his wife would require another blood transfusion. Anthony told the doctor,
“We are devout Jehovah’s Witnesses and we do not believe in taking the blood of another person. It is against our religion. My wife and I both carry valid ‘No Blood’ Cards with us at all times. If my wife were awake, she would tell you directly that she does not accept another’s blood. I’m sorry, but we cannot consent to that.”
The doctor made it clear to Anthony that without the transfusion, his wife would likely die. Anthony said, “I understand, but we believe that if she is transfused, she may not be able to enter heaven. For us, this is worse than death.”
At this time, the doctor was advised that Jillian’s condition had not stabilised and that she would also require a blood transfusion right away. When advised about his daughter’s worsening condition, Anthony told the doctor that he would not be able to provide consent to a transfusion for either his wife or daughter as his daughter had grown up in the Jehovah’s Witness’ church and also closely follows the teachings of their church. Dr Franks believes that he must transfuse both Jenny and Jillian in order to save their lives, despite Anthony’s refusal of consent.
Due to the seriousness of both Jenny and Jillian’s condition, RN Huang asked Anthony if there were any family members that he would like her to contact. Anthony told RN Huang that he had already informed his brother about the car accident on the way to the hospital but that he would not need to contact his sister as they were no longer in contact. He said that his sister was opposed to the family’s religious beliefs and that, after a fight, they no longer talk with each other. He said he didn’t want his sister to know anything about his family as it was a private matter. Unfortunately, Anthony’s brother contacted their sister and the sister has just phoned the nurse’s station asking for information about Jenny and Jillian. RN Huang is unsure whether she should discuss the information with Anthony’s sister.
Apply the ethical and legal decision-making framework to the scenario, to determine what Dr Franks and RN Huang should do.
LWD101 Ethics, Law and Health Care Best Assignment Writers.

 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE SOLUTION!!

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *