Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
8 pages/≈2200 words
Sources:
5 Sources
Level:
APA
Subject:
Social Sciences
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 34.56
Topic:

Lying and Withholding Medical Information are Forms of Deception (Essay Sample)

Instructions:

This is an extremely broad assignment instruction from my professor. I am taking Philosophy- biomedical ethics, so this course is an introduction to central issues in bioethics with a specific
emphasis on practice of health care. Over view of the course: "The emphasis of the course is on ethical reasoning and moral deliberation involving issues in health care. Topics may include patient autonomy and confidentiality, advanced directives, allocation of medical resources, health care advocacy, integrity, and issues pertaining to disability and end-of-life care. Students may also be introduced to major ethical theories and moral principles." So what i have decide to write on is about lying and withholding information. My topic question is something like this: "Should withholding be considered as morally equivalent to lies, if lying is wrong?"
According to Immanuel Kant from "On the supposed right to lie from benevolent motives", doesn't matter what the reason is, lying is always wrong. He also stated that withholding is wrong too, i think? Anyways, this paper needs 3 parts: an abstract, and a annotated bibliography, and the final paper. The abstract and bibliography should be maximum 500 words in total. Around 1000 words for the paper. My prof requests to have one VALID ARGUMENT in the paper, which I attached an instruction and a "Logic" paper so you can see what he means by valid argument. What i think for the valid argument is to have premises that will conclude "withholding is not wrong", one of the premises can be "withholding is not the same as lying", something like that. I also what to say something like the principles are "beneficence, non-maleficence etc." so we have a duty to full fill these. So to tell the truth some times can violate these principles.
The point is I am with Kant, i think lying is wrong, but I believe instead of lying, we can withhold information, as they are not the same. There is better time to tell patient something, and how you say it. sometimes, this seems to be a the most moral options in health care. Withholding when the perceived benefit to the patient (beneficence) out-weights the subsequent consequences (as Kant says lying always end with a bad consequence). My prof likes what is on the paper is states clearly in the introduction. Finally, if possible, some solution to the problem.
All of the references have to be written by a philosopher (preferably well known, and peer-reviewed, if not MUST MUST BE a philosopher) such as Immanuel Kant, Sherwin, David. C Thomasma, Robert Scott Stewart.
Please keep in mind, my prof is a philosopher, not a health care worker, so if the example is not within health care system, that is fine, as long as it sounds, and relevant. Please take a look at the instruction and the logic attachments. I prefer to have it written in APA format.
You dont need to have the 3 parts separate page. Just one after another is ok. I will divide them up to hand them in separately so we don't lose space.
The textbook i use is "Biomedical ethics a Canadian Focus" 3rd edition. For the bibliography, it is from only one of the references, so if we could choose the best one that support my idea that would be great.

source..
Content:

Philosophy - Biomedical Ethics: Lying and Withholding Medical Information are Forms of Deception
Student's Name
Institutional Affiliation
Philosophy - Biomedical Ethics: Lying and Withholding Medical Information are Forms of Deception
Introduction
In today's clinical practice, physicians who lie to their patients are harshly condemned while those that engage in non-deceptive strategies such as information withholding often face less criticism (Cox & Fritz, 2016). While some of these non-disclosure strategies have in recent times been challenged, such as withholding important information regarding medical errors and inadequately providing information to patients about the risks of certain procedures, there are areas of clinical practice where information non-disclosure is largely acceptable. It is often agreed that building trust between a physician and their patients is an essential element to strengthen their relationship and improve patient outcomes. In this regard, there some forms of behaviours such as lying, which physicians should never engage in because they directly undermine trust. At the same time, confidentiality is equally important to foster the relationship between physicians and their patients, but this has to be within given limits such as in cases where patients are likely to unknowingly infect others with HIV/AIDS (Benn, 2001). Should withholding be considered as morally equivalent to lies, if lying is wrong? In this paper, I argue that deception is morally wrong and it is therefore never acceptable to lie or withhold information from patients. I will first show that there is no difference between the act of lying and withholding the truth as the two are equally wrong. Secondly, I will argue that “paternalism” largely contradicts the principles of “patient autonomy” and show how the concept of “therapeutic privilege” challenges the principles of “non-maleficence” and “beneficence”. Lastly, I will dismantle Mack Lipkin's argument and argue against his premises as I believe it is the physician's role to always disclose important patient information truly and fully.
Patients' expectations and the role of the doctor in the patient-physician relationship are changing. Patient autonomy is fundamental, yet challenging, principle of professional medical ethics. The idea that individual patients should have a freedom to make choices about their lives, including medical matters, has become increasingly prominent in the current health care profession. However, this has not always been the case in the past, since physicians were the ones to make the decisions for their patients if they were perceived to not have the capacity to behold the truth. This action is justified by the theory of paternalism, which places physicians in positions of authority, and allowed them to make choices for their patients as a promotion of their welfare (Fisher et al, 2018, p.9). For the purpose of this paper, we will consider paternalism in the context of telling the truth and withholding information, which then raises the question: If lying and withholding is a form of deception, then is it ever permissible to deceive patients for “their own good”?
Therapeutic privilege allows physicians to withhold information from a patient if it is perceived that full disclosure will have both psychological and physical detrimental effects (Bassford, 2017). Richard and Lajeunesee (2010) argue that in any circumstances, if disclosing information that causes potential harm to patients, such as disclosing discouraging information, then they should withhold the information. I argue that the therapeutic privilege in this case is parallel to the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. Beneficence insi...

Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

Other Topics:

Need a Plagiarism Free Essay?
Submit your instructions!