According to the book \"BioEthics In Context\" please answer the following quest

Question

According to the book "BioEthics In Context" please answer the following questions in regards to chapter 5 Informed Consent in BioEthics (pages 157-170):

1) What is the moral basis for informed consent?

2) Explain the impediments that may mean that a patient's consent is not genuinely voluntary.

3) Is informed consent required for minor procedures such as blood draws?

4) Is consenting to a procedure afer being given only basic information considered morally and legally adequate?

5) Consider whether institutional policies take precedence over moral requirements. In your answer, consider whether deontologists, rule theorists, and utilitarians are likely to agree or disagree with the priority of institutional policies.

6) Describe the difference between informed consent as a process and an as event.

7) Explain the difference between coercion and manipulation in the informed consent process.

Explanation / Answer

1) What is the moral basis for informed consent?

It has illustrated that authentic moral dilemmas associated euthansia with informed consent either voluntarily by patient or non-voluntarily by other members in which a therapeutic method that is widely used to provide a patient with comfortable death. It is a type of palliative therapy implemented with moral & bio-ethical principles that are “the containment of incoherence”, when performing one course of action while working with a dilemma the other courses of action are lost and become unavailable. This makes ethical choices in dilemma situations particularly difficult and incoherent to get a decision due to low possibility to know about the exact and right course of action leading to negative consequences.

2) Explain the impediments that may mean that a patient's consent is not genuinely voluntary.

The impediments that may mean that a patient's consent is not genuinely voluntary include "legal consequences" because it is unethical to kill a human without moral principles as human life is precious irrespective of age, ethnicity and social class based on hi/her lethal or chronic devastating ill health (for example, in case of cancer). In specific cases when humans permissible to kill if 3 conditions morally met; if an innocent human has no future and he or she is going to die in due course either by debilitating disease or illness; innocent human who has no wish to live at all to go on living. Philosophical beliefs of a person in the deontological ethics and the utilitarian argument for the permissibility of suicide would meticulously feel ending a terminal patient’s life with severe disease is inexcusable. It has illustrated that the Hippocratic Oath aspects often reflect obligations on physicians and health practitioners to prevent patient to take harmful drugs even though patients are on their ending of life due to lethal suffering from diseases. For example, Lach’s claims are about the patient suicide is unconvincing according to ethics and utilitarian morality. Lach has illustrated that a patient who has been suffering severely from pain and with deadly disease will not recover but even has the responsibility of the health practitioners to provide patients with best possible care instead of providing palliative care to attain suicide. Therefore, according to medical and human morality, helping a patient to attain suicide due to his or her deadly incurable illness is highly unethical and frugal decision to make. Therefore, even a patient losing their dignity due to contact severe pain, suicide is inconvincible

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

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