Cart(0)
Sale!

Applying the Four Principles: Case Study

Based on this case study, I believe that beneficence should be the most important principle, as James’ parents should focus on what the physicians are telling them about the seriousness of his medical condition and the danger of skipping or delaying treatment. The parents, on the other hand, appear to be more concerned with the notion of autonomy and their decision to disregard the doctors and instead rely on their religion. Mike and Joanne clearly love their children and are not intentionally harming them, but their delay in seeking care has worsened James’ illness, which could now hurt Samuel if he is forced to have surgery and live the rest of his life with one kidney that may fail at some point. While I believe Mike and Joanne meant well, I believe their actions resulted in malice and a lack of justice for both boys. Case Study on Healing and Autonomy

The most essential principle, in my opinion, is beneficence, which is based on the Christian worldview. Beneficence is a primary Christian responsibility, but Christian ethics goes beyond the moral rule of beneficence, which applies to everyone at all times. It is a commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:2528),

 

 

 

 

Description

Contextual Features

Justice and Fairness

James cannot dictate for his parents concerning the steps to take about his medical condition because he is a child living under his parents, and his parents have full medical decisions on him. From my own point of view, there was no justice utilized because his parents denied him the necessary and immediate medical treatments and decided to take him to a faith healing services which couldn’t yield a positive result.

James’s twin brother, Samuel is also a child living under his parents; definitely he is in the same shoe with his brother because he cannot make any medical decision on his own. I believe there won’t be justice and it would not be fair if Samuel grows up without his twin brother, and later discover he could have saved his life.

From my own point of view, the parents do not use justice in making their decisions concerning the doctor’s recommendations instead seeking for miracle, and putting James’s life at risk in that process. They are conflicted because they want to use beneficence and do what is best for both of their children while still relying on their faith in God to heal but are unsure of the right decision to make, and the outcome of their faith in God.

 

Reviews

There are no reviews yet.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Contextual Features

Justice and Fairness

James cannot dictate for his parents concerning the steps to take about his medical condition because he is a child living under his parents, and his parents have full medical decisions on him. From my own point of view, there was no justice utilized because his parents denied him the necessary and immediate medical treatments and decided to take him to a faith healing services which couldn’t yield a positive result.

James’s twin brother, Samuel is also a child living under his parents; definitely he is in the same shoe with his brother because he cannot make any medical decision on his own. I believe there won’t be justice and it would not be fair if Samuel grows up without his twin brother, and later discover he could have saved his life.

From my own point of view, the parents do not use justice in making their decisions concerning the doctor’s recommendations instead seeking for miracle, and putting James’s life at risk in that process. They are conflicted because they want to use beneficence and do what is best for both of their children while still relying on their faith in God to heal but are unsure of the right decision to make, and the outcome of their faith in God.