NHS 4000 Application of the Ethical Decision-Making Model for Case Analysis
Application of the Ethical Decision-Making Model for Case Analysis
This model can be useful in analyzing various cases. The model is composed of components such as ethical behavior, moral judgment, and moral awareness (ANA, n,d). These components can be important for ethical decision-making. In this case, Mr. Straight has to recognize and acknowledge that there is an ethical dilemma by applying moral awareness. He also has to make a decision and choose to go with what is wrong or right; hence moral judgment comes into the picture. Besides, the results of the judgment are what constitutes ethical behavior. As such, the framework can be an important tool for critical thinking when an individual is countering an ethical dilemma.
The application of the moral awareness component means that Mr. Straight acknowledges the ethical dilemma resulting from the surgical error and the resultant lack of will to address and correct the issue by both chief of staff and Dr. Cutrite. Therefore, moral judgment is applied by trying to do the right by notifying the patient of the surgical errors performed during the operation through the chief of surgery or the surgeon. Through the model, Mr. Straight can think critically and apply moral judgment and awareness (ANA, n.d). Hence the ethical behavior he displays will be a reflection of the choice he makes in the face of this ethical dilemma. Even though he is not a member of the clinical staff, he is in administration. One of his tasks is to ensure that the patients get the expected levels of quality care. In addition, as a health care administrator, he has to uphold the four principles of justice, non-maleficence, beneficence, and autonomy. Therefore, these four principles will be key in helping Mr.Staight to arrive at an ethical decision.
The Effectiveness of the Communication Strategies Applied
Effective communication is key in passing the intended message across (Ennis-O-Connor & Mannion, 2020). Mr. Straight ought to have communicated assertively, confidently, and directly to the chief of surgery and the surgeon. This would have enabled him to uphold patient safety in any decision he was to make. Communicating directly is key here as the surgeon is politically powerful and has a connection.
Even though she also knew the surgeon as powerful and influential, the operating room supervisor decided to be direct in her communication to Mr.Staight and report the event. Hence, she upheld her integrity and was also honest. Through such open communication, she offered the surgeon a chance to swing into action and address the mistake and only when to Mr.Straight when she realized that it wouldn’t be possible. She presented the case concisely and clearly, which enabled him to adequately evaluate the case and make an informed decision. Mr.Straight, on the other hand, sought the chief of surgery’s opinion through a hypothetical situation which is not a clear and concise way of communication. This strategy was ineffective as the chief of surgery only had an idea that something was wrong but could not make an informed decision due to a lack of facts. This led to an apparent lack of concern in the case hence hindering ethical decision-making.
Even though there is strong willpower in Mr. Straight to solve the problem, he noticed that he did not effectively communicate since he decided to minimize direct communication with the surgeon. This is not the first case, as he has a history of refraining from fingernail-biting situations in the past years. This is an indication that he does not have sufficient capacity to handle ethical dilemmas, as he was reluctant to confront the surgeon regarding the errors and his clinical decline. By applying the four principles of healthcare ethics, Mr.Straight can effectively address the ethical dilemma he is facing.
The Solution to the Ethical Dilemma
As earlier indicated, the four principles of health care of justice, non-maleficence, beneficence, and autonomy are key in making sound ethical decisions when faced with ethical dilemmas. When applied, Mr. Straight could have better understood the ethical situation and the decision to be made. While autonomy entails patients’ rights, non-maleficence entails the responsibility of not intentionally causing harm to the patient. In addition, beneficence is engaging in actions that focus on upholding the patient’s interest while justice is giving fair and equal treatment to every patient (Sanders et al., 2018). It is evident that Mr.Straight fell short in using the principles as the patient was not informed of the case and offered a chance to decide on the next course of action. The decision was arrived at to leave the cap and not inform the patient without consulting her; hence, she was not treated fairly, and the action has the potential of leading to h