Case Study on Morale Status: Fetal Abnormality

Case Study: Fetal Abnormality
Jessica is a 30-year-old immigrant from Mexico City. She and her husband Marco have been in the United States for the last three years and have finally earned enough money to move out of their Aunt Maria’s home and into an apartment of their own. They are both hard workers. Jessica works 50 hours a week at a local restaurant and Marco has been contracting side jobs in construction. Six months before their move to an apartment, Jessica finds out she is pregnant.
Four months later, Jessica and Marco arrive at the county hospital, a large, public, nonteaching hospital. A preliminary ultrasound indicates a possible abnormality with the fetus. Further scans are conducted, and it is determined that the fetus has a rare condition in which it has not developed any arms and will not likely develop them. There is also a 25% chance that the fetus may have Down syndrome.
Dr. Wilson, the primary attending physician, is seeing Jessica for the first time, since she and Marco did not receive earlier prenatal care over concerns about finances. Marco insists that Dr. Wilson refrain from telling Jessica the scan results, assuring him that he will tell his wife himself when she is emotionally ready for the news. While Marco and Dr. Wilson are talking in another room, Aunt Maria walks into the room with a distressed look on her face. She can tell that something is wrong and inquires of Dr. Wilson. After hearing of the diagnosis, she walks out of the room wailing loudly and praying aloud.
Marco and Dr. Wilson continue their discussion, and Dr. Wilson insists that he has an obligation to Jessica as his patient and that she has a right to know the diagnosis of the fetus. He furthermore is intent on discussing all relevant factors and options regarding the next step, including abortion. Marco insists on taking some time to think of how to break the news to Jessica, but Dr. Wilson, frustrated with the direction of the conversation, informs the husband that such a choice is not his to make. Dr. Wilson proceeds back across the hall, where he walks in on Aunt Maria awkwardly praying with Jessica and phoning the priest. At that point, Dr. Wilson gently but briefly informs Jessica of the diagnosis and lays out the option for abortion as a responsible medical alternative, given the quality of life such a child would have. Jessica looks at him and struggles to hold back her tears.
Jessica is torn between her hopes of a better socioeconomic position and increased independence, along with her conviction that all life is sacred. Marco will support Jessica in whatever decision she makes but is finding it difficult not to view the pregnancy and the prospects of a disabled child as a burden and a barrier to their economic security and plans. Dr. Wilson lays out all of the options but clearly makes his view known that abortion is “scientifically” and medically a wise choice in this situation. Aunt Maria pleads with Jessica to follow through with the pregnancy and allow what “God intends” to take place and urges Jessica to think of her responsibility as a mother.
Case Study on Moral Status

Based on "Case Study: Fetal Abnormality" and the required topic study materials, write a 750-1,000-word reflection that answers the following questions:
What is the Christian view of the nature of human persons, and which theory of moral status is it compatible with? How is this related to the intrinsic human value and dignity?
Which theory or theories are being used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson to determine the moral status of the fetus? What from the case study specifically leads you to believe that they hold the theory you selected?
How does the theory determine or influence each of their recommendations for action?
What theory do you agree with? Why? How would that theory determine or influence the recommendation for action?
Remember to support your responses with the topic study materials.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Read the attached article, "The Image of God, Bioethics, and Persons With Profound Intellectual Disabilities," by Devan Stahl and John F. Kilner, from The Journal of the Christian Institute on Disability. ©2017 Joni and Friends, Agoura Hills, CA. Used with permission.
Read Chapters 2 from Practicing Dignity.
URL:
https://www(dot)gcumedia(dot)com/digital-resources/grand-canyon-university/2020/practicing-dignity_an-introduction-to-christian-values-and-decision-making-in-health-care_1e.php
Rubric:
PHI-413V PHI-413V-O501 Case Study on Moral Status 200.0

Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (65.00%) Satisfactory (75.00%)
Content 90.0%
Christian View of the Nature of Human Persons and Compatible Theory of Moral Status 30.0% Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible with is insufficient. Explanation is not supported by topic study materials. Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible with is unclear. Explanation is not clearly supported by topic study materials. Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible with is clear and explains the basic relationship to intrinsic human value and dignity. Explanation is supported by topic study materials.

Determination of Moral Status 20.0% The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is not adequately explained. Rationale for choices made is not supported by topic study materials or case study examples. The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is not clearly explained. Rationale for choices made is unclearly supported by topic study materials or case study examples. The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is explained and draws relevant conclusions. Rationale for choices made is supported by topic study materials and case study examples.

Recommendation for Action 20.0% Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is insufficient. Explanation is not supported by topic study materials. Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is unclear. Explanation unclearly supported by topic study materials. Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is clear. Explanation is supported by topic study materials.

Personal Response to Case Study 20.0% Evaluation of which theory is personally preferable along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is inadequate. Evaluation of which theory is preferable along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is lacking a personal connection. Evaluation of which theory is preferable within personal practice along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is clear.


Organization, Effectiveness, and Format 10.0%
Organization, Effectiveness, and Format 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.