Beneficence is one of the greatest ethical principle which mostly addresses the idea that the action by the physician should be in the manner that will promote the good of the patient. Doing well from the part of the physician is also important especially when it is will benefit the patient. Beneficence however need not to be confused by non-maleficence that states that a physician should not harm a patient.  The principle in regard to the case study means that the physician should have the obligation for him to protect his patient from harm by removing or preventing all parts of bad situations and promoting things that would benefit them.  In the cases study for example, it was the role of Mike to inform the physician that he had decided to make the decision to have his other son Samuel to lose a kidney and not allow the spiritual process since this was something that would be reversed.  Generally as a physician one is expected to see that patient as a whole and to think about the long term effects of the patients. This is because beneficence is centered on ensuring the good for a patient, the difficulty with this is that the principle often lies on the definition of what is good and what that good would mean to the patient.  For some patients, like in the case study, good might also means allowing them to die when their time comes, however to others, goo might mean ensuring the patient has undergone a difficult procedure so that their life is prolonged.