Blog 8: Legal Perspectives

As a business student, the topic of legal vs. ethical is not lost on me, as it is a very important topic in both the business world and the medical world. There is no clearly drawn line between the two, and this is where the problem arises. There are many activities that are completely legal, but are probably not considered the ethically correct thing to do. This is a particularly touchy subject in healthcare, as many choices a physician makes have an ethical position behind them.

Consider this: a doctor is brought up on a criminal charge of negligence, but is found not-guilty. In most cases, once the not-guilty verdict is read, the case is over. But for a doctor, the person who was allegedly harmed may turn to the civil courts to sue, saying that his unethical (but not quite illegal) actions caused the injury. A doctor is held to a much higher standard of ethics than you and I are, and for this reason, acting within the law with no regards for the morality of the decision is impossible. There are ethical codes in place at most medical institutions, and as such, doctors and healthcare administrators must research both the legality of their actions as well as the ethicality of them.

The textbook offers the case of the drunken surgeon, and the legal responsibility to remove him from the operating room. It also, however, deals with the ethical responsibility of the administrator to report this behavior, as it is very dangerous in the healthcare field. She is most likely not legally bound to report the incident, but ethically, she should.

This will continue to be a big problem as technology increases and the boundaries between legality and ethicality are blurred further.

Blog 7: Physician-Assisted Suicide

I came across an article entitled “Push for ‘death with dignity’ in Massachusetts picks up steam,” and was immediately intrigued, as this has been a hot topic for a long time. The article discussed the upcoming vote on whether or not physician-assisted suicide should be legal in the state of Massachusetts.

 

There are many people who find the topic of physician-assisted suicide a very unethical situation. They believe that no one should “play God” and that every time a physician decides to partake in this act, they are behaving unethically. These people also tend to believe that they are not doing everything in their power to sustain the patient’s life when deciding to help end the patient’s suffering. The American Medical Association is vehemently against this “death with dignity bill”, quoting the Code of Medical Ethics: “Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer. Instead of participating in assisted suicide, physicians must aggressively respond to the needs of patients at the end of life … in order that these patients continue to receive emotional support, comfort care, adequate pain control, respect for patient autonomy and good communication,” (O’Reilly, 2012).

 

On the other hand, some believe that they are committing the ultimate sacrifice by helping the patient end their suffering. I tend to fall on this side of the argument; if a patient is terminally ill and is suffering all of the time, I have no problem with physician-assisted suicide. It is not something the patient can do on their own, and it is their body, and therefore their decision. From this side of the argument, one could also look at the Medical Code of Ethics, as it is more-or-less about putting the patient’s needs first. It appears that a majority of residents of Massachusetts support the “death with dignity” bill, and they are hoping to follow behind Oregon and Washington.

 

Again, I support the idea of physician-assisted suicide, in that it is the patient’s decision to make, and they cannot do it themselves. It is not fair that they have to live in agonizing pain with no control over what happens to them.

 

References:

 

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2012/07/16/prsc0716.htm