NHS FPX 4000 Assessment 3 Attempt 1 Applying Ethical Principles
Dr. Kerr continues to endorse the general safety of vaccines and educates Jenna and Chris on vaccine safety profiles. She goes on to explain how they are updated regularly through the federal government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Which is sponsored by the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. She further educates the Smith’s by addressing the research done on Thimerasol; an ingredient once thought to cause autism and how medical research has proven that it does not increase the risk of ASD.
Click on this link if you are looking for NHS FPX 4000 Assessment 2
Finally, Dr. Kerr reminds the Smiths that some children cannot be vaccinated because they have weakened immune systems and that others are too young to be vaccinated. She goes on to say that these children are protected because almost all other children (and adults) have been vaccinated, thus decreasing their exposure to vaccine-preventable illnesses (VPIs). This is known as “herd immunity” and the more parents refuse immunization for their healthy children, the more the rate of VPIs increase. This puts vulnerable children at significant risk of morbidity and mortality.
4
NHS FPX 4000 Assessment 3 Attempt 1 Applying Ethical Principles
Dr. Kerr concludes by informing the Smith’s that most states require vaccinations before children can attend school. She adds that parents may decide not to vaccinate under specific circumstances, but that it varies by state. Ana’s parents confirm their understanding of what was explained to them but continue to decline vaccinations for Ana. Dr. Kerr is puzzled and isn’t sure how to move forward.
Get Your Paper Ready in No Time!!
Our Professional Ph.D. Writers are here for you!
Analysis of Ethical Issues in the Case Study
The Smith’s refusing to have Ana vaccinated is a perfect example of an ethical dilemma for the healthcare team. Ana’s parents stand firm in their decision to keep vaccines away from Ana despite medical advice, because they wholly believe that the risks outweigh the benefits.
Dr. Kerr’s teachings have taught her the importance of vaccinations and she wants to protect Ana from acquiring vaccine-preventable infections while also having her contribute to herd immunity for the health of the general public. However, Dr. Kerr has hit a wall and despite her best efforts, Ana’s parents continue to refuse her vaccines. Dr. Kerr, their pediatrician has properly educated the Smith’s on the importance and the rationale behind the vaccines, but it falls on deaf ears. Their research has convinced them otherwise.
Using the Ethical Decision-Making Model to Analyze the Case Study
Moral awareness, moral judgement and ethical behavior, which are the main pillars of the ethical decision-making model, can assist in analyzing this case study. Moral awareness, the first step to behaving ethically, refers to a health care professional’s ability to detect and appreciate
5
ethical aspects of a decision that they must consider. Dr. Kerr understood that Jenna and Chris Smith thought they were morally right in making the choice to not have Ana vaccinated and that going against their wishes would be a breach of the ethical provision which provides for autonomy.
Moral judgement refers to a health care professional’s personal beliefs about what is right and wrong. Dr. Kerr demonstrated moral judgement when she informed Ana’s parents about the advantages of having her vaccinated because she felt it was the right thing to do. She hoped that she could convince the parents to allow Ana to be immunized by doing so. Health care professionals should ensure that patients and their parents make informed decisions. The pediatrician also understood that informing the Smith’s was the right thing to do so that their decisions would be based on facts.