Biomedical Ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Biomedical Ethics - Essay Example agree to Starson, taking the medication would disrupt him from pursuing his research being a gifted theoretical physicist, he believed that this research was the lone(prenominal) reason he felt his life carried a meaning. In this sense, being unable to carry on with it would simply render his life useless and meaningless. However, the doctor felt that Starsons refusal was informed by his inability to appreciate the value of treatment. Consequently, the physicians petitioned to have Starsons treatment determination transferred to a surrogate. Though the petition was granted, Starson would by and by appeal, and the petition was reversed at the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court held that a patient, in this encase Starson, was non required to raise a decision that is in their trump interest as intractable by the physician, and thence they are permitted to disagree with a treatment recommendation. The Court also reasoned that Starson wa s a competent patient capable of making his consume medical decisions. This case has both legal and ethical implications firstly, this study delves into examining the ethicalness in a physician imposing treatment, and secondly, the study also looks at physicians position in determining a patients best interest whether they are entitled to make this decision on behalf of the patient and how far can they go with this. The study will also look at the concept of informed consent and the whim of competence. Argument 1 The above case represents a difference of these two rather ethical considerations. On the one hand, the physician feels compelled to do what he believes is in the best interest of the patient. On the other hand, the patient feels that it is his right to refuse medication based on his own grounds. on a lower floor these circumstances, how far is the physician expected to go with his persistence? Most legal cases, non only in Starsons case, often uphold the position of the patient. This is referred to as patient self-reliance. The principle of patient autonomy states that competent patients have the opportunity to choose among medically indicated treatment and to refuse any unwanted treatment. Under these circumstances, the physician must respect the patients decision. It is necessary to understand that treatment decisions are not only based on objective medical considerations scarce also involve a ample level of personal value judgments and preferences (Meier, Isaacs, and Hughes 95). Therefore, to some extent, the physician may compel a patient to shoot a certain medication not only because it is the right and objective medical step but also because he feels, based on his values and preferences, it is the right thing. For the latter, he is imposing his personal feelings, not professional mandate, to the patient. In these cases, a physician may be ethically driven to compel a patient to take medication because he feels it is the right thing to do. However, it is essential to note that a physician demonstrates respect for human dignity, a biomedical ethical consideration, when he acknowledges the freedom and right of the patient to make choices based on their own beliefs and values (Kluge 7). Perhaps another consideration arising from Starsons case is the idea of sound medical treatment. Starson, for some reason, felt that the medication offered was disruptive and would interfere with his ability to complete his physical science research. Indeed, physicians are ethically forbidden to