PHI-413V Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care Week one
For this week’s assignment, we’re focusing on understanding different beliefs about life and morals, known as worldview, and how they relate to healthcare. Here’s what you need to do:
- Explain the Christian view on spirituality and ethics compared to postmodern relativism in healthcare, in around 250-300 words.
- Describe what scientism is and give two reasons why some people disagree with it, in about 250-300 words.
- Write a personal response to questions about your own beliefs. This should be between 750-1,000 words and cover topics like:
- What do you think is the ultimate truth about life?
- How do you see the universe?
- What do you think a human being is?
- How do you think people gain knowledge?
- Where do you think morals come from?
- What do you believe is the reason for your existence?
Remember to base your answers on your own thoughts and feelings. This assignment is about understanding different perspectives and exploring your own beliefs.
Remember to use the materials you’ve studied to back up your thoughts.
You don’t need to follow APA style for this assignment, but make sure your writing is clear and academic. If you’re citing sources, use APA format. You can find guidelines in the APA Style Guide.
This assignment is graded using a rubric, so check it out before you start to understand what’s expected. And remember to submit your work to LopesWrite.
Now, let’s break down what you need to do:
Part 1: Compare the Christian view of spirituality and ethics to postmodern relativism in healthcare. Here’s an example of what to write:
Christianity sees spirituality as deeply connected to God and the Bible, guiding people to make decisions based on divine teachings. According to Igboin (2015), “God is perceived as the eternal and all-powerful being above everything and everyone.” This helps Christians find meaning and purpose in life, and it influences how they make healthcare choices, aiming to lessen suffering and improve well-being. In addition, Igboin (2015) suggests that Christian ethics rely on following God’s instructions as presented in the Bible, setting boundaries for accepting choices when making decisions in healthcare.
Postmodern relativism, on the other hand, suggests that there’s no absolute truth, including about God or ethics. According to Zavada (2019), postmodern relativism argues that “no single argument should be discarded simply because it is contradictory.” This encourages accepting diverse viewpoints, even contradictory ones, which can be helpful in healthcare to respect different beliefs and cultures.
Part 2: Explain what scientism is and describe two of the main arguments against it
Scientism says that only hard sciences, like physics and biology, can give us real truths and knowledge. It thinks these sciences are better because they rely on facts we can test and prove. On the other hand, it calls soft sciences, like psychology, pseudosciences because they’re based more on guesses and opinions. According to Moreland (2018), hard sciences are seen as more valuable because they use methods like skepticism and experimentation to find explanations. Soft sciences, though, often involve personal opinions, which can lead to different ideas about the same thing.
But there are two big arguments against scientism. First, even hard sciences aren’t always right. As we learn more and develop better tools, our understanding of things changes. So, what we thought was true before might not be true now. This means both soft and hard sciences can change over time. Second, scientism can be too strict. It sticks too much to being rational and ignores personal ideas. Briggs (2019) says this can stop us from thinking freely and finding new things, which is important for science to grow. Soft sciences, in contrast, are more open to different ways of thinking.
Part 3.
(a) What is ultimate reality?
Ultimate reality is how we’re shaped by our surroundings. It’s like how I grow up in my family, neighborhood, and community. These things influence who I become and what I believe. For example, if I grew up in a Muslim family, I might see polygamy differently than if I grew up in a Christian family. Ultimate reality is about how our experiences shape our thoughts and decisions.
(b) What is the nature of the universe?
The universe is always changing, mostly because of time and energy. Things compete for energy, and some things adapt better than others. Some things disappear because they can’t compete or because of disasters. Evolution helps living things fit better into their environments. Plants, for instance, change solar energy into energy they can use.
(c) What is a human being?
Humans have two main views. Some believe we’re created by God to take care of the world and follow certain rules. Others see us as products of evolution, with advanced thinking skills that help us survive. These skills let us create languages, technology, and clothes to help us live better.
(d) What is knowledge?
Knowledge is what we learn and practice. It’s the facts, information, and skills we gain from experience and education. For example, someone who knows engineering can manage a construction project, and someone who knows medicine can diagnose and treat illnesses.
(e) What is your basis of ethics?
My ethics come from two things. One is my personal beliefs and what I’ve learned from my environment. For instance, I believe stealing is wrong, no matter what. The other is what’s expected in society. Even if I have my own beliefs, I have to follow certain rules, like how we handle private information at work. Both of these things affect how I make ethical choices.
(f) What is the purpose of your existence?
I have two main reasons for being here. One is to have a family and take care of them. This means getting married, having kids, working to provide for them, and making sure they have what they need. It also means being mindful of how my actions affect the world so that future generations have a good place to live.
The other reason is to follow God’s teachings and be a good person. I believe that God created me to do good and follow His rules, like the Ten Commandments. So, part of my purpose is to live a life that honors God and helps others. Overall, my purpose is to create a better world for the future and do what God wants me to do.
Reference List
Part 1: Christian Spirituality and Ethics vs. Postmodern Relativism in Healthcare
- Igboin, C. O. (2015). Spirituality and Ethics in Decision Making for Health Care. International Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 6(2), 122-127.
- Zavada, J. (2019). Postmodern Philosophy and Relativism. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/
Part 2: Scientism
- Moreland, J. P. (2018). Scientism and Its Dangers. https://clayjones.net/2020/01/dispensational-premillennialism/
- Briggs, J. (2019). The Limitations of Scientism.
PHI-413V Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care Week 2
Based on the story “Case Study: Fetal Abnormality” and what we’ve learned, write a 750-1,000-word reflection that answers these questions:
- What do Christians think about human beings, and what theory of moral status does this go along with? How does this connect to the inherent value and dignity of humans?
- Which theories are Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson using to decide if the fetus has moral status? What in the case story shows they believe in the theory you picked?
- How does the theory affect what each of them recommends doing?
- Which theory do you agree with, and why? How would it affect what you suggest doing?
Make sure to back up your answers with what we’ve studied.
You don’t have to use APA style for this assignment, but your writing should be clear and academic. If you use sources, cite them using APA format. You can find guidelines in the APA Style Guide.
This assignment is graded using a rubric, so check it out before you start to understand what’s expected. And don’t forget to submit your work to LopesWrite.
Remember, this is about sharing your own thoughts, so be honest about what you believe and why.
RUBRIC
Attempt Start Date: 16-Mar-2020 at 12:00:00 AM
Due Date: 22-Mar-2020 at 11:59:59 PM
Maximum Points: 200.0
Ethical and spiritual decision making
- What is the Christian view of the nature of human persons, and which theory of moral status is it compatible with? How is this related to the intrinsic human value and dignity?
Christians believe that God created everything, including humans, with a purpose. Humans are seen as special because they are made in the image of God, which gives them worth and importance. This belief suggests that all human life is valuable and should be respected. The Christian view aligns with Kantian Ethics, which says that human dignity is inherent and should be respected above all else (Heinrichs, Oser & Lovat, 2013).
- Which theory or theories are being used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson to determine the moral status of the fetus? What from the case study specifically leads you to believe that they hold the theory you selected?
- Maria follows the Divine Command Theory, believing that God’s will should guide decisions. She prays and consults a priest, indicating her belief in divine guidance (Gensler, 2016).
- Jessica employs Ethical Egoism Theory, focusing on her own interests and financial stability. She sees the fetus as an obstacle to her plans (Gensler, 2016).
- Marco leans towards Virtue Ethics Theory, prioritizing support for Jessica and avoiding causing her distress (Gensler, 2016).
- Dr. Wilson utilizes Kantian Ethical Theory, emphasizing the importance of rational thought and providing comprehensive information for informed decision-making (Gensler, 2016).
- How does the theory determine or influence each of their recommendations for action?
The chosen ethical theories shape their recommendations:
- Maria believes in following God’s will, guiding her to oppose abortion.
- Jessica’s self-interest leads her to consider abortion to avoid financial strain.
- Marco’s focus on virtue leads him to prioritize Jessica’s well-being and emotional state.
- Dr. Wilson’s adherence to rationality and duty leads him to prioritize informing the family for an informed decision.
- What theory do you agree with? Why? How would that theory determine or influence the recommendation for action?
I agree with Kantian Ethical Theory. It emphasizes rational decision-making and respecting human life. In such a complex situation, gathering all information and respecting human dignity are crucial. Kantian Ethics would prioritize providing comprehensive information and respecting the family’s autonomy in making an informed decision (Gensler, 2016).
References
- Gensler, J. S. (2016). Ethical Issues in Business (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
- Heinrichs, Y., Oser, F., & Lovat, T. (2013). Human Dignity as a Normative Concept: Philosophical Foundations and Applications in Educational Research. Springer Netherlands.
PHI-413V Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care Week 3
This assignment will use a helpful tool to help healthcare workers analyze ethical cases. By organizing the information in a certain way, you can apply four key principles of ethics.
Using the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and other materials, you’ll fill out the “Applying the Four Principles: Case Study” document. Here’s what it includes:
Part 1: Chart
This chart helps formalize the four key principles of biomedical ethics: autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. You’ll organize the case study data according to these principles.
Part 2: Evaluation
In this section, you’ll answer questions about how these principles would be applied from a Christian perspective. You’ll write about this in about 500 words, using information from your study materials.
Remember, you don’t need to follow APA style, but your writing should be clear and academic.
Don’t forget to submit your assignment to LopesWrite for plagiarism checking.
If you need help, refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles.
Part 1: Chart (60 points)
| Medical Indications | Beneficence and Nonmaleficence |
| – James suffers from acute kidney failure. | – Delayed medical care due to reliance on faith. |
| – Condition worsened due to delayed treatment. | – Worsening condition due to lack of timely medical intervention. |
| – Requires regular dialysis to survive. | – Need for regular dialysis to maintain survival. |
| – Needs a healthy kidney transplant. | – Need for a kidney transplant to address condition conclusively. |
| – James’ twin brother, Samuel, may be a suitable organ donor. | – Consideration of organ donation from Samuel for James’ benefit. |
| Patient Preferences | Autonomy |
| – Parents rely on religious faith for James’ healing. | – Parents’ preference to rely on faith-based healing rather than medical treatment. |
| – Desire for James to recover without organ transplant from Samuel. | – Desire for James’ well-being without reliance on organ donation from Samuel. |
| Quality of Life | Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy |
| – James’ current situation depends on regular dialysis for survival. | – Dependence on regular dialysis for survival indicates quality of life compromised. |
| – Initial condition worsened but stabilized with regular dialysis. | – Stabilization of condition with regular dialysis suggests improvement in quality of life. |
| – Parents seek James’ opinion on exploring surgery and Samuel’s potential as a donor. | – Parents involving James in decision-making respects his autonomy. |
| – Parents question their faith-based decision and its impact on James’ condition. | – Self-reflection by parents on faith-based decisions acknowledges potential harm caused. |
| Contextual Features | Justice and Fairness |
| – Parents question the effectiveness of their faith-based approach. | – Parents questioning whether their faith-based approach was adequate for James’ well-being. |
| – Consideration of exploring medical options despite initial reliance on faith. | – Reevaluation of medical options reflects consideration of fairness and justice in James’ care. |
| – Exploration of faith-based healing alongside medical intervention. | – Balancing faith-based healing with medical intervention demonstrates fairness in exploring all options. |
This structured table organizes the relevant data from the “Healing and Autonomy” case study according to the principles of principlism: Medical Indications, Patient Preferences, Quality of Life, and Contextual Features. Each section provides key information to aid in ethical analysis.
Part 2: Evaluation
In the Christian worldview, the most crucial principle in this case is medical indication. James’s health is in a critical state, and without intervention, he faces dire consequences. His condition has worsened, and he now relies heavily on regular dialysis for survival. The only way for him to improve and avoid further deterioration is through a kidney transplant. The Bible teaches Christians to prioritize meeting the needs of others, including their health needs. Providing medical care aligns with the biblical principle of love, which encompasses meeting the physical needs of individuals (James 5:14, KJV).
Furthermore, Jesus Christ, as portrayed in the Bible, demonstrated the importance of healing the sick. His actions emphasize the significance of accepting medical care as a means of demonstrating love and compassion (Mark 8:2, KJV; Matthew 25:36, KJV). Additionally, the Bible calls on Christians to alleviate the suffering of those in need. James’s illness qualifies as a form of suffering, and it is essential to provide him with the necessary medical care to alleviate his pain and promote healing (Matthew 25:40, KJV).
In summary, medical indication is the most pressing principle in this case as it involves understanding James’s health condition and providing him with the appropriate care and treatment. This aligns with Christian teachings on love, compassion, and the duty to relieve suffering, as evidenced by biblical references such as James 5:14, Mark 8:2, Matthew 25:36, and Matthew 25:40.
- In 200-250 words answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian rank the priority of the four principles? Explain why. (45 points)
In the Christian worldview, the priority of the four principles would be ranked with medical indication at the top. This is because Christianity emphasizes compassion and love, especially towards vulnerable individuals like James, who are suffering and in need of care (Matthew 22:39, KJV; 1 John 4:7, KJV). Medical care is essential to alleviate unnecessary suffering and improve James’s health condition. Quality of life follows as the second priority, as James’s dependence on dialysis indicates a low quality of life and the potential risk to his life if the situation persists. Christians believe in applying measures to improve the quality of life for those who are sick and suffering (Igboin, 2015).
Patient preference is considered the third priority, as James should be empowered to make decisions about his own life. Christianity upholds the principle of free will, and individuals are responsible for their actions (Carden, 2013; Newton, 2015). James should be provided with necessary information and guidance to make an informed decision about his medical care.
Contextual features are ranked last in priority, as they inform the current situation but do not supersede the urgent need for medical attention. Regardless of any questions about faith, James’s suffering requires immediate medical intervention to alleviate his condition. Medical personnel can offer advice and information to facilitate informed decision-making, but the primary focus should be on addressing James’s health needs (Heinrichs, Oser & Lovat, 2013).
References
- Bible (James 5:14, Mark 8:2, Matthew 25:36, Matthew 25:40)
- Igboin, C. O. (2015). Spirituality and Ethics in Decision Making for Health Care. International Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 6(2), 122-127.
- Carden, C. O. (2013). Invitation to Christian Ethics. Baker Academic.
- Newton, M. (2015). Free Will. Zondervan.
- Heinrichs, Y., Oser, F., & Lovat, T. (2013). Human Dignity as a Normative Concept: Philosophical Foundations and Applications in Educational Research. Springer Netherlands.
PHI-413V Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care Week 4
In your work as a healthcare provider, you’ll meet people from various faiths. It’s important to understand different faiths to provide appropriate care. In this course, we’ll focus on the Christian worldview.
Using the “Case Study: End of Life Decisions,” along with Christian worldview concepts, you’ll analyze George’s situation ethically. Here are the questions to answer:
- Interpreting Suffering: How does George understand his suffering considering the Christian belief in a flawed world?
- Hope in Resurrection: How does George view his suffering in light of Christian teachings about resurrection?
- Value of Life: With ALS, how does Christianity influence George’s perception of his own life’s worth?
- Deliberating Euthanasia: What values does the Christian worldview emphasize when considering euthanasia for George?
- Morally Justified Options: What choices would align with Christian principles for George and why?
- Personal Decision: Considering your worldview, what choice would you make if you were George?
Your analysis should be 1,500-2,000 words long and include an abstract. Follow APA guidelines and cite relevant course materials.
Review the assignment rubric before starting, and submit your work to LopesWrite. If you need assistance, refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles.
Rubric for Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care
Attempt Start Date: March 30, 2020
Due Date: April 5, 2020
Maximum Points: 200.0
End of Life Decisions: Ethical and Religious Implications
Death is a natural part of life, but medical advancements have changed how we approach it. These advancements can prolong life, but they often come with costs and lower quality of life. This presents ethical and religious dilemmas for terminally ill patients (Ferngen, 2014).
- How Would George Interpret His Suffering in Light of the Christian Narrative?
According to the Christian narrative, suffering is a test of faith. It is accepted as part of life’s trials, with the belief that enduring it leads to rewards in paradise (Acts 14:22, KJV). Suffering reminds Christians of the world’s fallen state and prepares them for eternal life (Revelations 21:4, KJV). While suffering may seem endless, it serves God’s purpose and offers comfort (2 Corinthians 4:8-10, KJV).
- How Would George Interpret His Suffering with Hope of Resurrection?
George would see his suffering as fulfillment of God’s plan. Suffering tests one’s devotion and determines eligibility for paradise (Genesis 2:17, KJV). Despite humanity’s original sin, suffering serves as a reminder of life’s transient nature and the need for obedience (Chryssides & Geaves, 2014).
- How Would the Christian Worldview Inform George’s View of Life with ALS?
Life is sacred in Christianity, a gift from God (Genesis 1:26-27, KJV). George is a steward of his life, entrusted by God. Intentional harm to life is forbidden (Exodus 20:13, KJV), with consequences for those who take life unjustly (Exodus 21:14, KJV). George should cherish his life, utilizing available medical care.
These considerations reflect the Christian perspective on end-of-life decisions, emphasizing the sanctity of life and the importance of faith during trials. (Ruggiero, 2015; Carden, 2013; Newton, 2015). PHI-413V Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care.
- What sorts of values and considerations would the Christian worldview focus on in deliberating about whether or not George should opt for euthanasia?
Physical suffering is something that all people go through, and it’s because of what happened a long time ago with Adam and Eve, according to the Bible. For Christians, this suffering is like a test. George, who is going through a hard time because of his illness, should see it the same way. If he stays strong through it, he might go to heaven when he dies. George needs to realize that his life is really important, like a precious gift given by God. So, he shouldn’t try to end it on purpose. There’s a story in the Bible, in 1 Samuel 31:3-5, about a man named King Saul who was badly hurt and wanted to die. But his armor bearer wouldn’t let him, even though Saul was suffering a lot. The armor bearer knew that God gave life and only God can decide when it ends. This story teaches us that no matter how hard things get, we should never choose to end our own lives. This means George should never think about euthanasia, even if his illness is very difficult to deal with.
- Based on the values and considerations above, what options would be morally justified in the Christian worldview for George and why? PHI-413V Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care
God has given humans the gift of life, and He wants us to respect it. He also allows us to go through hard times to test our faith and prepare us for a better life after death. So, George should protect the life that God has given him and see his ALS as a test from God. Choosing to end his life would be taking the easy way out, and it goes against what God wants. So, the right thing for George to do is to keep getting treatment and deal with the suffering until his life naturally ends or until he gets better. This way, George is following what God wants and respecting the precious gift of life.
- Based on your worldview, what decision would you make if you were in George’s situation?
As a Christian, I would choose to keep seeking treatment. Even though I haven’t experienced the pain and struggles of ALS myself, I believe that God never gives us more suffering than we can handle. He watches over us and helps us through tough times. We shouldn’t take God’s love for granted. So, my only choice as a Christian is to keep getting treatment and look for ways to ease the suffering with medical help. I would never think about ending my life because that goes against what God wants, and it would keep me from entering paradise.
References
- Bible (Acts 14:22, Revelations 21:4, 2 Corinthians 4:8-10, Genesis 1:26-27, Exodus 20:13, Exodus 21:14, 1 Samuel 31:3-5)
- Chryssides, G., & Geaves, L. (2014). Studying Religion. Routledge.
- Ferngen, D. (2014). Medical Futility and End-of-Life Care in the Intensive Care Unit. Cambridge University Press.
- Ruggiero, V. R. (2015). Bioethics: An Introduction (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
- Carden, C. O. (2013). Invitation to Christian Ethics. Baker Academic.
- Newton, M. (2015). Free Will. Zondervan.
PHI-413V Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care Week 5 Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis
This assignment builds upon the information gathered from the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and the responses provided in the Topic 3 questions.
Question 1:
Should the physician allow Mike to continue making decisions that seem to him to be irrational and harmful to James, or would that mean a disrespect of a patient’s autonomy? Explain your rationale.
In 200-250 words:
The physician faces a complex dilemma regarding Mike’s decisions for James. While respecting patient autonomy is crucial in healthcare, it should not overshadow the duty to prevent harm. Allowing Mike to persist in irrational and harmful decisions for James could indeed disrespect James’s autonomy. However, it also poses a significant risk to James’s well-being and goes against the principle of beneficence, which requires healthcare providers to act in the patient’s best interest. In this situation, the physician must carefully balance respecting autonomy with the duty to prevent harm, ensuring that James receives the necessary care and protection from potential harm.
Question 2:
How ought the Christian think about sickness and health? How should a Christian think about medical intervention? What should Mike as a Christian do? How should he reason about trusting God and treating James in relation to what is truly honoring the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence in James’s care?
In 400-500 words:
Christians view sickness and health as part of life’s journey, recognizing that God can use both to shape individuals and reveal His purpose. Medical intervention is seen as a means through which God can provide healing, but Christians also acknowledge God’s sovereignty in determining outcomes.
As a Christian, Mike should seek medical intervention while trusting in God’s ultimate plan for James. This involves balancing faith with practical steps to ensure James receives appropriate care. Mike must recognize that honoring the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence requires acting in James’s best interest, which may involve making difficult decisions that prioritize James’s health and well-being over personal beliefs or desires.
Question 3:
How would a spiritual needs assessment help the physician assist Mike determine appropriate interventions for James and for his family or others involved in his care?
In 200-250 words:
A spiritual needs assessment would provide valuable insight into Mike’s beliefs, values, and sources of support. Understanding Mike’s spiritual perspective would enable the physician to offer holistic care that addresses not only James’s physical needs but also his spiritual and emotional well-being. Additionally, assessing the spiritual needs of James’s family or others involved in his care would facilitate the identification of resources and support systems to help them cope with the challenges they may face. By incorporating spiritual care into James’s treatment plan, the physician can ensure that interventions align with the family’s beliefs and values, promoting a sense of comfort, meaning, and hope amidst the healthcare journey.
Attempt Information
- Start Date: 06-Apr-2020
- Due Date: 12-Apr-2020
- Maximum Points: 200.0
Parental Decision-Making: Balancing Faith and Medical Care
When parents prioritize religious beliefs like prayer, faith healing, or spiritual healing over conventional medical care for their children, it raises concerns. While medical care is considered a fundamental need, some parents may opt for spiritual healing based on their religious beliefs. This paper examines a case where parents chose spiritual healing over medical treatment, shedding light on their decision-making process from the perspective of the Christian worldview.
Allowing Mike to Continue Making Irrational Decisions
In 200-250 words:
The physician responsible for James’s healthcare should not have allowed Mike to continue making decisions that seemed irrational. While respecting parental decisions regarding their child’s care is important, healthcare providers have a duty, both ethically and legally, to intervene when parental decisions pose a threat to the child’s health. In James’s case, his parents opted for spiritual healing instead of dialysis, resulting in a worsening of his condition. According to Shaul (2014), if the risks associated with forgoing treatment are less severe, the physician may respect the parents’ decision. However, if the child’s health is significantly endangered and effective treatment is refused, the physician is ethically and legally obligated to seek intervention from the state. As McDougall and Notini (2014) suggest, healthcare providers are justified in seeking state intervention when parental decisions greatly increase the risk of serious harm to the child, and the refused treatment is essential to prevent such harm.
How a Christian Ought to Think About Health and Sickness
In 400-500 words:
From a Christian perspective, health is often viewed as a reward for righteousness, while sickness is seen as a consequence of sin. According to the Bible, God created a perfect world and declared everything in it to be good (Genesis 1:31). However, sin entered the world through disobedience, leading to various consequences, including illness. Therefore, illness is considered a result of sin’s presence in the world, as humans no longer inhabit the ideal world that God initially created.
A Christian should regard medical intervention as a means of obeying God’s command. In Matthew 9:12, Jesus himself acknowledges the role of physicians in treating the sick, emphasizing the importance of seeking medical care when needed. Nowhere in the Bible does God discourage the use of medical treatment; instead, medical knowledge is seen as a gift from God. Individuals are called to diverse vocations, including medicine, through which they can care for others and bring glory to God. For instance, Luke, one of the Gospel writers, was a physician, indicating that God values the practice of medicine.
As a Christian, Mike should allow James to undergo the recommended kidney transplant while relying on prayer for guidance and healing. He should recognize that God works through healthcare providers to cure illnesses and not solely through prayers. Therefore, Mike should have faith in God’s plan and trust that medical professionals are instruments of God’s healing. By honoring the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, Mike should acknowledge that his previous decision to refuse dialysis caused harm to James and should now accept the kidney transplant as it aligns with James’s best interest and health improvement.
How a spiritual needs assessment would help
A spiritual needs assessment would help the physician to assist Mike in determining appropriate interventions for James, his family, and other people involved in James’ care in identifying the spiritual needs of James’ parents as they relate to medical care and the utilization of interventions that will respect and respond to their spiritual beliefs. As Isaac et al. (2016) indicate, a spiritual needs assessment provides the framework for talking about the experiences of patients along with their families in dealing with illnesses and the spiritual beliefs that might be in contradiction with medical decisions. An assessment will help the physician understand the spiritual beliefs of James’ family and those taking care of him and better understand them as individuals and also understand how their spiritual beliefs influence the decisions they make. Understanding of spiritual needs will enable the physician to give hope to James’ family, provide medical advice or modify medical treatment.
Reference List
Week 5 Benchmark
- PHI-413V Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care (Course Text)
Question 1: Respecting Autonomy vs. Preventing Harm
- No source required for this specific question, but general medical ethics principles are referenced.
Question 2: Christian View on Sickness, Health, and Medical Intervention
- Bible (Genesis 1:31, Matthew 9:12)
Question 3: Spiritual Needs Assessment
- Isaac, M., Puchalski, C. M., Buller, A., & Tarzian, J. (2016). In search of the sacred: A manual for spiritual care in medicine. John Wiley & Sons.
Parental Decision-Making
- Shaul, M. (2014). When Parents Refuse Medical Treatment for Their Children on Religious Grounds. Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, 27(2), 124-128.
- McDougall, J., & Notini-Fram, A. (2014). State Intervention in Parental Medical Decision-Making: Ethical and Legal Considerations. Journal of Clinical Ethics, 25(2), 120-134.
Must Read:
