HSM 542 FINAL EXAM – QUESTION AND ANSWERS
I I I I I I I
1. (TCO IH) IEthics Iis Idefined Iby IPozgar Ias I"a Ibranch Iof Iphilosophy Ithat Ideals Iwith
IvaluesIrelating Ito Ihuman Icontact Iwith Irespect Ito Ithe Irightness Iand Iwrongness Iof Iactions
Iand Ithe Igoodness Iand Ibadness Iof Imotives Iand Iends." IDescribe Itwo Iethical Idilemmas Iyou
Imay Iencounter Iin Ia Ihealthcare Isetting Irelated Ito Ipatient Icare. IIn Ithe Idescription, Idefine
Iat IleastIone Ilaw Ior Iregulation Ithat Imay Iapply Ito Ieach Iethical Idilemma. I(Points I: I35)
One Imajor Iethical Idilemma Ithat Imay Ibe Iencountered Iin Ia Ihealthcare Isetting Iis Idealing
I with Iabortion. I This Iissue Iis Idifficult Ibecause Iit Ican Irestrict Ior Idemand Ithat Ia Iprofessional
IperformIa Iduty Ithat Ithey Ido Inot Ibelieve Iis Iethical. IThe Idilemma Iis Icaused Iby Ithe Iconflict Ibetween
IpersonalIa nd Iprofessional Iethics.
Because Iabortion Iwas Ilegalized Iin IRoe Ivs. IWade Iin I1973 Ithe Ilaw Icompels Imedical
Iprofessionals Ito Iprovide Imedical Itreatment I(Pozgar, I2012). IUnder IRow Ivs IWade Imedical
Iprofessionals Iare Ilimited Ito Iproviding Iabortions Ito Ithe Ifirst Itwo Itrimesters.
Another Imajor Iethical Idilemma Ithat Imay Ibe Iencountered Iin Ia Ihealthcare Isetting Iis Ithe Iissue
Iinformed Iconsent. IFrom Ia Ilegal Iperspective, Ipatients Iwho Iare Inot Iprovided Iproper Iinformation
Iconcerning Iprocedures, Ihave Ithe Iright Ito Iseek Ilegal Iremedy. IUnder Ithe Ilaw, Ithe Ipatient Imust
Iprovide Iconsent Iand Imust Iunderstand Iwhat Ishe Iis Iconsenting Ito Ihaving Iperformed. IThis Ishould Ibe
Idone Iin Iwriting Ias Iwell Ias Iverbally Iin Imany Iinstances I(Pozgar, I2012).
One Iof Ithe Iearliest Ilegal Icases Iwhich Iestablished Ithe Iconcept Iand Irequirement Ifor Iinformed
Iconsent Iwas ISchloendorff Ivs. ISociety Iof INew IYork IHospital Iin I1914 I(Mary IE. ISchloendorff,
IAppellant, Iv. IThe ISociety Iof Ithe INew, I1914). IIn Ithis Ilandmark Icase Ia Iphysician Iremoved Ia Itumor
Ifrom Ia Ipatient Iwho Ionly Iconsented Ito Ia Idiagnostic Iprocedure. IThe Ijudge Iruled Ithat Iin Ithis Icase
Iruled Ithat Ian I“individual’s Ifundamental Iright Ito Idecide Iwhat Iis Ibeing Idone Iwith Ihis Ior Iher Ibody.”
IThe Iphysician Iwas Iliable Iboth Iin Icivil Iand Icriminal Icharges. ISince Ithat Icase, Ithe Iconcept Iof
Iinformed Iconsent Ihas Ibeen Icontinuously Idefined Iand Iupheld Iby Icourts.
References
Mary IE. ISchloendorff, IAppellant, Iv. IThe ISociety Iof Ithe INew. I(1914). IMary IE. ISchloendorff,
IAppellant, Iv. IThe ISociety Iof Ithe INew. IRetrieved Ifrom IUniversity Iof IWisconsin:
Ihttps://mywebspace.wisc.edu/rstreiffer/web/CourseFolders/BioandLawF99Folder/Readin
Igs/SchloendorffvSociety_of_NY.pdf
Pozgar, IG. ID. I(2012). ILegal IAspects Iof IHealthcare IAdministration. ISudbury: IJones I& IBartlett
ILearning.
2. (TCO ID) IA Ipatient's Ifamily Imay Ibe Iactively Iinvolved Iin Iend-of-life Idecisions Ifor Ipatients
Iwho Iare Iincapacitated Ior Iincompetent. ICompare Iand Icontrast Itwo Ilegal Icases Ithat
IaddressIthe Irights Iof Ifamilies Iin Iparticipating Iin Iend-of-life Idecisions. IFor Ieach Ilegal Icase,
Iidentify Ihow Ithe Icase Ieither Icontributed Ior Idetracted Ifrom Ithe Irights Iof Ifamilies. I(Points I:
I30)
The ITerri IShiavo Icase Iwas Ia Idifficult Iethical Isituation Idue Ito Ithe Ifact Ithat ITerry Idid Inot Ihave Ian
Iadvance Idirective. IAfter Ibeing Iin Ian Iaccident Iit Iwas Iconfirmed Ithat ITerry Iwas Iin Ia Ipersistent
Ivegetative Istate Iand Iwould Imost Ilikely Inever Irecover. IThe Idecision Imaking Ifor ITerry Iwould
Inormally Ifall Ito Ia Iwill Ior Iadvance Idirective. ISince Ithis Iwas Inot Iavailable, Ithe Inext Iof Ikin I(husband
Iand Ifamily) Iwould Ibecome Ithe Idecision Imakers Ifor ITerry. IHowever, Ineither Iparty Iwas Ia
Icompelling Icandidate Ifor Imaking Ia Idecision Iconcerning ITerry’s Ilife.
This Istudy Isource Iwas Idownloaded Iby I100000841397762 Ifrom ICourseHero.com Ion I04-17-2022 I14:03:22 IGMT I-
05:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/18000445/HSM-542-Week-8-Final-Exam/
I I I I I I I
1. (TCO IH) IEthics Iis Idefined Iby IPozgar Ias I"a Ibranch Iof Iphilosophy Ithat Ideals Iwith
IvaluesIrelating Ito Ihuman Icontact Iwith Irespect Ito Ithe Irightness Iand Iwrongness Iof Iactions
Iand Ithe Igoodness Iand Ibadness Iof Imotives Iand Iends." IDescribe Itwo Iethical Idilemmas Iyou
Imay Iencounter Iin Ia Ihealthcare Isetting Irelated Ito Ipatient Icare. IIn Ithe Idescription, Idefine
Iat IleastIone Ilaw Ior Iregulation Ithat Imay Iapply Ito Ieach Iethical Idilemma. I(Points I: I35)
One Imajor Iethical Idilemma Ithat Imay Ibe Iencountered Iin Ia Ihealthcare Isetting Iis Idealing
I with Iabortion. I This Iissue Iis Idifficult Ibecause Iit Ican Irestrict Ior Idemand Ithat Ia Iprofessional
IperformIa Iduty Ithat Ithey Ido Inot Ibelieve Iis Iethical. IThe Idilemma Iis Icaused Iby Ithe Iconflict Ibetween
IpersonalIa nd Iprofessional Iethics.
Because Iabortion Iwas Ilegalized Iin IRoe Ivs. IWade Iin I1973 Ithe Ilaw Icompels Imedical
Iprofessionals Ito Iprovide Imedical Itreatment I(Pozgar, I2012). IUnder IRow Ivs IWade Imedical
Iprofessionals Iare Ilimited Ito Iproviding Iabortions Ito Ithe Ifirst Itwo Itrimesters.
Another Imajor Iethical Idilemma Ithat Imay Ibe Iencountered Iin Ia Ihealthcare Isetting Iis Ithe Iissue
Iinformed Iconsent. IFrom Ia Ilegal Iperspective, Ipatients Iwho Iare Inot Iprovided Iproper Iinformation
Iconcerning Iprocedures, Ihave Ithe Iright Ito Iseek Ilegal Iremedy. IUnder Ithe Ilaw, Ithe Ipatient Imust
Iprovide Iconsent Iand Imust Iunderstand Iwhat Ishe Iis Iconsenting Ito Ihaving Iperformed. IThis Ishould Ibe
Idone Iin Iwriting Ias Iwell Ias Iverbally Iin Imany Iinstances I(Pozgar, I2012).
One Iof Ithe Iearliest Ilegal Icases Iwhich Iestablished Ithe Iconcept Iand Irequirement Ifor Iinformed
Iconsent Iwas ISchloendorff Ivs. ISociety Iof INew IYork IHospital Iin I1914 I(Mary IE. ISchloendorff,
IAppellant, Iv. IThe ISociety Iof Ithe INew, I1914). IIn Ithis Ilandmark Icase Ia Iphysician Iremoved Ia Itumor
Ifrom Ia Ipatient Iwho Ionly Iconsented Ito Ia Idiagnostic Iprocedure. IThe Ijudge Iruled Ithat Iin Ithis Icase
Iruled Ithat Ian I“individual’s Ifundamental Iright Ito Idecide Iwhat Iis Ibeing Idone Iwith Ihis Ior Iher Ibody.”
IThe Iphysician Iwas Iliable Iboth Iin Icivil Iand Icriminal Icharges. ISince Ithat Icase, Ithe Iconcept Iof
Iinformed Iconsent Ihas Ibeen Icontinuously Idefined Iand Iupheld Iby Icourts.
References
Mary IE. ISchloendorff, IAppellant, Iv. IThe ISociety Iof Ithe INew. I(1914). IMary IE. ISchloendorff,
IAppellant, Iv. IThe ISociety Iof Ithe INew. IRetrieved Ifrom IUniversity Iof IWisconsin:
Ihttps://mywebspace.wisc.edu/rstreiffer/web/CourseFolders/BioandLawF99Folder/Readin
Igs/SchloendorffvSociety_of_NY.pdf
Pozgar, IG. ID. I(2012). ILegal IAspects Iof IHealthcare IAdministration. ISudbury: IJones I& IBartlett
ILearning.
2. (TCO ID) IA Ipatient's Ifamily Imay Ibe Iactively Iinvolved Iin Iend-of-life Idecisions Ifor Ipatients
Iwho Iare Iincapacitated Ior Iincompetent. ICompare Iand Icontrast Itwo Ilegal Icases Ithat
IaddressIthe Irights Iof Ifamilies Iin Iparticipating Iin Iend-of-life Idecisions. IFor Ieach Ilegal Icase,
Iidentify Ihow Ithe Icase Ieither Icontributed Ior Idetracted Ifrom Ithe Irights Iof Ifamilies. I(Points I:
I30)
The ITerri IShiavo Icase Iwas Ia Idifficult Iethical Isituation Idue Ito Ithe Ifact Ithat ITerry Idid Inot Ihave Ian
Iadvance Idirective. IAfter Ibeing Iin Ian Iaccident Iit Iwas Iconfirmed Ithat ITerry Iwas Iin Ia Ipersistent
Ivegetative Istate Iand Iwould Imost Ilikely Inever Irecover. IThe Idecision Imaking Ifor ITerry Iwould
Inormally Ifall Ito Ia Iwill Ior Iadvance Idirective. ISince Ithis Iwas Inot Iavailable, Ithe Inext Iof Ikin I(husband
Iand Ifamily) Iwould Ibecome Ithe Idecision Imakers Ifor ITerry. IHowever, Ineither Iparty Iwas Ia
Icompelling Icandidate Ifor Imaking Ia Idecision Iconcerning ITerry’s Ilife.
This Istudy Isource Iwas Idownloaded Iby I100000841397762 Ifrom ICourseHero.com Ion I04-17-2022 I14:03:22 IGMT I-
05:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/18000445/HSM-542-Week-8-Final-Exam/
