Ethical Considerations ProjectReview the reading and lecture.Read Ethics Article:Smugar, S., Spina, B., & Merz, J. (2000, September). .equella.ecollege.com/file/06f96e26-e040-48d8-a345-a773f4af4ce7/1/documents–Informed%20consent%20file.pdf”>Informed Consent for Emergency Contraception: Variability in Hospital Care of Rape Victims.American Journal of Public Health, 90(9),1372-1376. Retrieved November 28, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database.Complete the Ethical Considerations Project. .equella.ecollege.com/file/06f96e26-e040-48d8-a345-a773f4af4ce7/1/documents–ethics_project_description.docx”>Ethical Considerations Project RequirementsSubmit your lab to the Dropbox located on the silver tab at the top of this page. For instructions on how to use the Dropbox, read these .next.ecollege.com/default/launch.ed?ssoType=DVUHubSSO2&node=184″>step-by-step instructionsor watch this Tutorial .next.ecollege.com/default/launch.ed?ssoType=DVUHubSSO2&node=232″>Dropbox Tutorial.See the SyllEthical Considerations
Project
Read the assigned article, Informed Consent for Emergency Contraception: Variability in
Hospital Care of Rape Victims.
Review theBrownfield v. Daniel Freeman Marina
Hospital case summary. (Below)
Review Essay Requirements.(Below)
Brownfield
v. Daniel Freeman Marina Hospital
Ascension Health
(2007) Brownfield v. Daniel Freeman Marina Hospital.Retrieved November
28, 2008 from
.ascensionhealth.org/ethics/public/cases/cases_AF.asp”>http://www.ascensionhealth.org/ethics/public/cases/cases_AF.asp
In this 1989
federal appellate court case, the plaintiff was taken to Freeman Hospitals
emergency room after being raped. In response to the patients request for
information about the morning-after pill, the hospital authorities refused to
provide such information, believing that they could not, on the grounds that it
was a Catholic hospital. Specifically, the hospital did not inform the patient
that if she wanted such treatment it must be obtained within 72 hours to be
effective. The court reasoned that a patient has the right to make her own
decisions regarding treatment, and therefore, adequate disclosure of
information must be provided so the patient can make an informed
decision. The court concluded that a rape victim who is denied information
about access to the morning-after pill may bring a medical malpractice action.
This means that liability may arise if the patient can show: 1) that a skilled
practitioner would have provided such information and access under similar
circumstances; 2) that she would have elected such treatment; and 3) that
“damages” (in this case, pregnancy) resulted from the failure to
provide such information. In a footnote to its decision, the court indicated
that “access” to such treatment could include transfer of the patient
to another medical facility or another physician.
More critical for Catholic-sponsored hospitals, the court
also reasoned that the morning-after pill constitutes the
“prevention” rather the than “termination” of pregnancy. It
therefore concluded that the conscience clause under the states abortion statute
did not immunize the hospital from liability for failure to refuse to provide
such information. However, since human life begins at conception
(fertilization) and not merely after implantation of the embryo, the relevant moral
question from the Catholic perspective is not whether or not there is a
pregnancy, but whether or not there is another innocent human life to be
respected. Those “contraceptive” measures that operate solely through
the prevention of implantation are morally equivalent to abortions in Catholic
moral theology, and are therefore impermissible under the Ethical and
Religious Directives (both then and now). Nevertheless, the court did not
accept this moral distinction as relevant for its ruling.
The court ruling itself stated that Catholic Hospitals have
the responsibility “to provide information concerning, and access to,
estrogen prophylaxis for rape victims.”
Essay
Requirements:
You are to complete a 1-2 page (12pt Times New Roman font, double
spaced) issue analysis that answers the following questions:
What are
the ethical considerations of this issue?
What are
the legal considerations of this issue?
What
ethical concepts and principles apply to this issue?
If you
were a judge in the Brownfield
v. Daniel Freeman Marina Hospitalcase, would you agree with the other
judges decisions? How would you justify this decision to the hospital or
the rape victims?
Your
submission is to be a formal, multi-paragraphed essay. While citations and
sources are not required for this paper, if you borrow any information as
supporting details, they must be cited in proper APA format.Review the reading and lecture.Read Ethics Article:Smugar, S., Spina, B., & Merz, J. (2000, September). .equella.ecollege.com/file/06f96e26-e040-48d8-a345-a773f4af4ce7/1/documents–Informed%20consent%20file.pdf”>Informed Consent for Emergency Contraception: Variability in Hospital Care of Rape Victims.American Journal of Public Health, 90(9),1372-1376. Retrieved November 28, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database.Complete the Ethical Considerations Project. .equella.ecollege.com/file/06f96e26-e040-48d8-a345-a773f4af4ce7/1/documents–ethics_project_description.docx”>Ethical Considerations Project RequirementsSubmit your lab to the Dropbox located on the silver tab at the top of this page. For instructions on how to use the Dropbox, read these .next.ecollege.com/default/launch.ed?ssoType=DVUHubSSO2&node=184″>step-by-step instructionsor watch this Tutorial .next.ecollege.com/default/launch.ed?ssoType=DVUHubSSO2&node=232″>Dropbox Tutorial.See the SyllEthical Considerations
ProjectBrownfield
v. Daniel Freeman Marina HospitalAscension Health
(2007) Brownfield v. Daniel Freeman Marina Hospital.Retrieved November
28, 2008 from .ascensionhealth.org/ethics/public/cases/cases_AF.asp”>http://www.ascensionhealth.org/ethics/public/cases/cases_AF.asp In this 1989
federal appellate court case, the plaintiff was taken to Freeman Hospitals
emergency room after being raped. In response to the patients request for
information about the morning-after pill, the hospital authorities refused to
provide such information, believing that they could not, on the grounds that it
was a Catholic hospital. Specifically, the hospital did not inform the patient
that if she wanted such treatment it must be obtained within 72 hours to be
effective. The court reasoned that a patient has the right to make her own
decisions regarding treatment, and therefore, adequate disclosure of
information must be provided so the patient can make an informed
decision. The court concluded that a rape victim who is denied information
about access to the morning-after pill may bring a medical malpractice action.
This means that liability may arise if the patient can show: 1) that a skilled
practitioner would have provided such information and access under similar
circumstances; 2) that she would have elected such treatment; and 3) that
“damages” (in this case, pregnancy) resulted from the failure to
provide such information. In a footnote to its decision, the court indicated
that “access” to such treatment could include transfer of the patient
to another medical facility or another physician.More critical for Catholic-sponsored hospitals, the court
also reasoned that the morning-after pill constitutes the
“prevention” rather the than “termination” of pregnancy. It
therefore concluded that the conscience clause under the states abortion statute
did not immunize the hospital from liability for failure to refuse to provide
such information. However, since human life begins at conception
(fertilization) and not merely after implantation of the embryo, the relevant moral
question from the Catholic perspective is not whether or not there is a
pregnancy, but whether or not there is another innocent human life to be
respected. Those “contraceptive” measures that operate solely through
the prevention of implantation are morally equivalent to abortions in Catholic
moral theology, and are therefore impermissible under the Ethical and
Religious Directives (both then and now). Nevertheless, the court did not
accept this moral distinction as relevant for its ruling.The court ruling itself stated that Catholic Hospitals have
the responsibility “to provide information concerning, and access to,
estrogen prophylaxis for rape victims.” Essay
Requirements:You are to complete a 1-2 page (12pt Times New Roman font, double
spaced) issue analysis that answers the following questions:Your
submission is to be a formal, multi-paragraphed essay. While citations and
sources are not required for this paper, if you borrow any information as
supporting details, they must be cited in proper APA format.
