Case Study Healing And Autonomy
Christians have been taught to put their trust and faith in God in everything they do in life. God does not put us through difficulties that we cannot handle and overcome. We learned about God’s miraculous works from the Bible. It is believed that there is no illness that God cannot heal through prayer and faith. Many Christian faiths have been put to the test by this ideology. In this case study, Godfearing Christians et al. are dealing with some serious issues with one of their twin sons, James. They are forced to make a decision that contradicts their ethical and moral beliefs regarding the health of both of their sons. Their Christian faith forces them to choose between using medical science and entrusting their son’s life to God.
The two most pressing issues in this case study are as follows. Mike and Joana, for example, decided to forego medical care and the use of a dialysis machine in favor of putting their faith in God. James initially had strep throat, which is usually treatable on its own with antibiotics, but due to his high blood pressure and large fluid buildup, he required Dialysis to help relieve him. James’ health suffered greatly as a result of their decision to forego this treatment in order to place their faith in God through prayer and healing service. Despite the fact that they arrived only two days later, his illness worsened because it spread all the way to his kidney, causing kidney failure. The other major issue they are dealing with is that James requires a kidney transplant because he was not placed on the Dialysis machine, and neither parent is a potential donor due to the different tissue types. They both had to have matching tissue types in order to be donors. Samuel, the other twin brother, is the only other person with a matching tissue type. They only have two choices: let God handle everything or have Samuel undergo kidney transplant surgery. The issue here is how they could potentially endanger their child with surgical complications in order to save the life of their other child. These issues are extremely difficult to overcome in the Christian narrative and vision.
Considering the moral and ethical issues with which this family is dealing, The principles that best describe this situation are Beneficence, autonomy, and nonmaleficence. “Autonomy is a principle that requires respect for the decision-making capacities of autonomous persons,” Meilaender writes in Bioethics: A Primer for Christians (Meilaender 2013). Initially, James’s parents chose to leave his faith to God and attend a special spiritual healing event. It was the Doctor’s responsibility to honor and respect their wishes, as well as to treat the patient as if he were still a minor under their care. Unfortunately, this decision backfired. The Doctor’s job as a medical professional and someone who comes from a knowledgeable background is to do his best to keep his patient safe; explain all the risks to parents because they have the highest authority when it comes to their minor child’s life; and respect the parents’ autonomy when it comes to formulating health decisions for their son James. This relates to the principle of Beneficence.
The Nonmaleficence principle states that people should not intentionally harm others. This principle is important because in order to save one child, they must harm the other child by exposing them to the potential complications of surgery (Engelhardt 2000). To come up with the best solution, parents must be given useful and adequate information to process and understand every worst-case scenario. They must also collaborate with the Doctor to achieve a balance of medicine and spiritual healing.
The Doctor is in an unusual situation because, in his mind, he knows James needs to be placed on the dialysis machine, but he is only allowed to advise the parents to do so. He cannot make them do anything they do not wish to do. The Doctor can be confident that he is making the best decision for someone’s health, but they must also understand that the decision is ultimately theirs, no matter how dire the consequences appear. The Doctor and Mike must collaborate with Joanne and James to analyze and devise the best way to save James’ life while also respecting their Christian beliefs to seek God’s help and believe that he will always provide.
According to Shelly and Miller’s book Called to Care: Nursing from a Christian perspective, “Living in God’s true story, learning how he works out his purposes, trusting when we can’t see him working: these all enable nurses to live in hope. We want to share our optimism with patients and colleagues. We don’t have to just hope in hope. We know the God of hope, who fills us with peace and joy in believing, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit we may abound in hope” (Shelly & Miller 2009). The family must understand that, from a Christian perspective, God created medicine in some way. If used for healing, the use of medicine does not defy God in any way. The medicine acts as a conduit for God’s miracles in terms of how malicious diseases can be cured using such methods.
This case could be classified as child endangerment. The family was presented with a potentially fatal illness that could be fatal if not treated properly, but they chose to decline this treatment. By presenting this information, the Doctor did his best and also offered a solution to preventative care for this child. Because the child is still a minor, the Doctor cannot gradually involve the parents due to ethical considerations. Regardless of their reasoning, the parents should not have removed their child from the hospital. The diaphysis was important in relieving fluid buildup, and the parents could have sought spiritual healing after receiving immediate medical attention. The Doctor could have gone the extra mile by involving his superiors. They are facing fatal injuries as a result of a lack of preventative care. Now they must decide whether to intentionally harm their other son Samuel in order to save his twin, James.
Individuals frequently mix up physical, scientific, and spiritual healing methods. James’s parents’ faith in God clouded their judgment about their son’s well-being. Christianity is a powerful and wonderful religion that, when practiced properly, can be very fulfilling. God employs medicine and science as tools to heal all of his followers. Mike and Joanna, as Christians, should have faith in God’s work and be persistent in their prayers because they need God now more than ever to watch over their two sons. Having trust and faith in God while still using the technology he has given us to ensure James’ and many other similar cases’ survival in the future.
Reference:
Engelhardt, H. T. (2000). The foundations of Christian bioethics. Taylor & Francis.
Meilaender, G. (2013). Bioethics: A primer for Christians. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
Shelly, J. A., & Miller, A. B. (2009). Called to care: A Christian worldview for nursing. InterVarsity Press
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
In addition to the topic study materials, use the chart you completed and the questions you answered in Topic 3 about “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” as the basis for your responses in this assignment.
Case Study Healing And Autonomy
Answer the following questions about a patient’s spiritual needs in light of the Christian worldview.
- In 200-250 words, respond to the following: Should the physician allow Mike to continue making decisions that seem to him to be irrational and harmful to James, or would that mean disrespect of a patient’s autonomy? Explain your rationale.
- In 400-450 words, respond to the following: How ought the Christian think about sickness and health? How should a Christian think about medical intervention? What should Mike as a Christian do? How should he reason about trusting God and treating James in relation to what is truly honoring the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence in James’s care?
- In 200-250 words, respond to the following: How would a spiritual needs assessment help the physician assist Mike to determine appropriate interventions for James and for his family or others involved in his care?
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. You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.
Rubric:
1. Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed from both perspectives with a deep understanding of the complexity of the principle of autonomy. The analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses. 20%
2. Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed with a deep understanding of the complexity of the Christian perspective, as well as with the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. The analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses. 20%
3. How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father to determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is clearly analyzed with a deep understanding of the connection between a spiritual needs assessment and providing appropriate interventions. The analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses. 30%
4. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. The thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. 7%
5. Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. 8%
6. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. 5%
7. All format elements are correct. 5%
8. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to the assignment and style, and the format is free of error. 5%
There are three different parts to this paper:
· Part one deals with Mike’s decision-making capabilities.
· Part two deals with how to think about issues related to sickness and health.
· Part three deals with a spiritual assessment.
Read “Doing a Culturally Sensitive Spiritual Assessment: Recognizing Spiritual Themes and Using the HOPE Questions,” by Anandarajah, from AMA Journal of Ethics(2005).
Read “End of Life and Sanctity of Life,” by Reichman, from the American Medical Association Journal of Ethics, formerly Virtual Mentor (2005).