Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative

Applying the Four Principles: Case Study
Part 1: Chart (60 points)
Based on the “Healing and Autonomy” case study, fill out all the relevant boxes below. Provide the information by means of bullet points or a well-structured paragraph in the box. Gather as much data as possible.
Medical Indications
Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

Patient Preferences
Autonomy

Beneficence means that a healthcare provider is obliged to perform tasks that benefit the patient. On the other hand, nonmaleficence forbids a healthcare provider from creating any form of harm or injury to the patient (Gillon, 2018). In the case study, the healthcare provider executes BeneficenceBeneficence by suggesting that doing immediate dialysis on James will correct kidney damage seen through fluid buildup and high blood pressure. Nonmaleficence is seen when the nephrologist informs James' parents that there exists a suitable donor: Samuel, though it is clear that it would pose a serious health risk to him too by having just a single kidney.

Autonomy means that the patient has the right and the capacity to make informed and voluntary decisions (Gillon, 2018). In the case study, the healthcare provider demonstrated autonomy when he respected the decision of James' parents to prioritize their faith and spiritual intervention over seeking healthcare. Additionally, the nephrologist allows Mike to decide on the possibility of Samuel donating a kidney to James. James and Samuel's decision over their health has not been indicated, even though they ought to have a say in this.

Quality of Life
Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy

Contextual Features
Justice and Fairness

The nephrologist's effort to dialyze James is meant to save his life and improve the prognosis. However, it reduces James' quality of life. Mike, the boys' parents, is skeptical about allowing Samuel to donate a kidney to James, as he thinks he might start having ill health and a lower quality of life. However, if Samuel donates a kidney to James, there is a high possibility that James’ quality of life will be improved. Nothing has been said regarding the autonomy of both James and Samuel. If given a chance to make their own decisions, there is a high likelihood that James and Samuel would prefer each other's health over everything. Their support, encouragement, and love towards each other would translate to improved quality of life.

Justice and fairness mean giving the patient what he deserves truthfully and equally. In the case study, Justice and Fairness are demonstrated in how the healthcare provider offers full care to James to improve his quality of life. It is also seen in how Mike takes his time to think whether it is just and fair to expose Samuel to health risks to save his brother, James. However, we do not see Joanne's contribution to whether Samuel should donate his kidney to James. This seems unjust and unfair as she is not involved in most of her sons' health decisions. Additionally, arguing from a medical view, i...