Answer Happy

12:58 PM Mon Apr 25 9.57% < 5 TO + 0 Objective: Analyze pertinent elements of the case, using the Four-Topic Paradigm: medical indications, patient preferences, and quality of life/functionality with any relevant contextual features, to determine a therapeutic goal or recommendation. In each case analysis, the student should be able to: Briefly identify the medical indications of the case, and briefly summarize, if relevant, the disease Hunter state, its prognosis, and the appropriate standards of care. Describe medical indications, patient preferences, quality of life issues and relevant contextual features 3. Clearly identify the moral values and/or legal issues of an ethical situation, highlighting the six values that commonly apply to medical ethics: Autonomy - patient has the right to refuse or choose their treatment Natalie Beneficence - practitioner should act in the best interest of the patient. Non-maleficence - "first, do no harm Justice & Fairness - distribution of scarce health resources and decision of who Yasmine gets what treatment a. Faimess and equality Dignity - patient and the person treating the patient) have the right to dignity Veracity/Truth-telling - informed consent. Aimara Identify whether the key aspects of a valid informed consent to accept or refuse treatment have occurred, if appropriate. Determine decisional capacity, if appropriate. List the relevant professional duties the clinician has to the patient and/or family and to the health Gina care team/system, if appropriate. Incorporate all the above factors into a comprehensive plan to resolve the current ethical concern. @ao 8 Week 4 Autonomy and Informed Consent MS is a 28year-old woman who has had asthma ever since her early childhood. She amives in the emergency department (ED) with a severe alma attack, accompanied by her sister. The attending physician, Dr V, begins treatment with inhaled and intravenous medications, but believes MS is on the verge of respiratory arrest and tell her that she needs to be intubated and placed on a ventilator, MS refuses, indicating that she believes she will recover without intubation. She asks Dr V to call her father Dr S. a physician, which he does. Dr Sreviews the situation with Dr Vand suggests that De V should wait to see if MS makes a recovery, because his experience with his daughter's asthma leads him to believe she will recover without intubation or mechanical ventilation. After this conversation, DeV reassesses MS. She has not worsened significantly since his last evaluation but given that she is not clearly improving Dr Vasconvinced that she will experience respiratory arrest and quite possibly die as a result. Despite the continued objections of MS and her sister, be indicates that he is going to sedate and intubate ber. When she resists, Dr Vinstracts ED staff to restrain her while he sedates and intubates het placing her on a mechanical ventilator latro Side 6 Questions to ponder: What are the claments of informed consent or informed refusal? What are emergency consent and implied content? What are the elements of decision-making capacity. Does MS have decision-making capacity? Is she competent? Explain the role of surrogate decision-makers with respect to informed consentirefusal What is the group's consensus on how this case should have been resolvedJustify the group decision. <