Applying Ethical Frameworks in Practice

Applying Ethical Frameworks in Practice
Name
Institution
Applying Ethical Frameworks in Practice
The Ethical Dilemma
The ethical dilemma from this case is whether to initiate treatment for a 6-year-old boy or not because both parents differ. The mother (not biological) does not give consent because of her religious background. On the other hand, the father gives consent for the treatment to initiate immediately. However, the physician is torn between going with the decision of the mother or that of the father.
Uustal’s Model
Diane Uustal developed the Uustal’s model of decision-making in 1993. This model follows the nursing process of decision-making and also incorporates values clarification when dealing with ethical decision-making (Adam, Odell & Welch, 2013). Nurses are expected to have a cautious value system because it is the key to ethical decision-making. In this way, Uustal model calls for personal responsibility in a person’s life and helps in coming up with ethical choices when making any decisions. From this model, Uustal developed 9 steps that guide physicians in ethical decision-making (Doherty & Purtilo, 2011).
Resolving the Dilemma using Uustal’s Model
Step 1: Identify the problem.
This step requires identifying the involved parties, how they are related, and the issue involved (Barza & Cohen, 2015). From the case, a 6-year-old boy has been diagnosed with meningitis and so the physician requires the parents’ consent to begin the treatment. The mother who is not the biological parent but has primary custody refused to initiate the treatment for religious purposes. The biological father wants the treatment started on the boy. The conflict here is whether the physician should avoid starting treatment on the boy because the mother refuses or go ahead with the treatment because the father agrees.
Step 2:
This step involves the physician stating his/her personal values and the ethical position one takes on the problem (Adam, Odell & Welch, 2013). From the case, as the physician, I should initiate treatment immediately because the child has a life threatening condition. The preservation of life is more important at this stage and this is unshakable.
Step 3:
This step brings into consideration other factors that are connected to the situation and developing alternatives in solving the dilemma (Adam, Odell & Welch, 2013). One of the alternatives that is related to this dilemma is that the mother is not the biological parent of this child. The other alternative to consider is that religious beliefs should not outweigh the life of another person. The other alternative is to consider the will of the biological father outweighing the mother. Finally, the other alternative is that as a physician I am called to save lives.
Step 4:
This step involves examining and categorizing the alternatives. This means the views that are consistent and those inconsistence with the physician’s personal views (Doherty & Purtilo, 2011). From the alternative choices, the idea of saving a life outweighs religious beliefs and the biological father is interested in saving his son’s life are consistence with the physician’s view...