Category: Health Law and Ethics

Week 4 Project
Instructions
Before beginning work on this assignment, please review the expanded grading rubric for specific instructions relating to content and formatting.
NONCONSEQUENTIAL ETHICS
Each week, you will have the opportunity to explore an ethical theory—consequential ethics, utilitarian ethics, deontological ethics, and nonconsequential ethics—in the context of a case scenario from your textbook. In this week, the focus will be on nonconsequential ethics.
Nonconsequential ethics suggests that the assessment of right or wrong must be based on the action and not the consequences.
Tasks:
Download and save the assignment template to your computer and update the file name to include your last name.
Review the assigned case in its entirety.
Address the questions posed in detail and with appropriate scholarly support.
To support your work, use your course and textbook readings and also use the South University Online Library. As in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references for the citations in APA format.
Submission Details
By the due date assigned, submit your document to the Submissions Area.
MHA6060: Health Law
and Ethics
Week 4 Assignment
NONCONSEQUENTIAL
ETHICAL THEORY
Please review the following case:
Chelsea
was preparing to drape Mr. Smith’s leg in OR 6 for surgery when she was
approached by Nicole, the nurse manager. Nicole asked, “Chelsea, please come to
OR 3. We have an emergency there and urgently need your skills to assist the
surgeon.” Chelsea turned to Daniel, the surgical technician, and asked him to
continue prepping Mr. Smith’s leg for surgery. Daniel prepped the leg prior to
the surgeon entering the room. The surgeon entered the room a few minutes later
and asked, “Where is Chelsea?” Daniel replied, “She was called away for an
emergency in OR 3. Karen will be shortly in to assist us.”
Following
the surgery, Mr. Smith was transferred to the recovery room. While he was in
the recovery room, a nurse was looking at the patient’s medical record as to
the notes regarding the patient’s procedure during surgery. She noticed that
the surgery was conducted on the wrong leg.
Although
there was a heated discussion between the surgeon and the nursing staff, each
member of the staff had good intentions, but the outcome was not so good.
Nonconsequentialists believe that right or wrong depends on the intention. They
generally focus more on deeds and whether those deeds are good or bad. In this
case, the intentions were good but the outcome was bad. It should be noted that
nonconsequentialists do not always ignore the consequences.
They
accept the fact that sometimes good intentions can lead to bad outcomes. In
summary, nonconsequentialists focus more on character as to whether someone is
a good person or not. Nonconsequentialists believe that right or wrong depends
on the intention. Generally, the consequentialist will focus more on outcomes
as to whether they are good or bad.
Please address the following
questions drawing support from your course resources and credible scholarly
resources cited in APA format:
1.      Describe how the nonconsequential
theory of ethics applies in this case.
2.      What questions might a
consequentialist raise after reviewing the facts of this case and why.
References
Special Note
Special Instruction/Notes for the Project:
Research is required for each section (a minimum of/at least three different citations per section). Note that the rubric calls for explicit research. At least three separate academic citations/sources per section!
Please show where all bullet points start and end.
Please provide a well-defined conclusion. All submissions are to have a conclusion. 
Please provide three pages explaining and answering the questions.
Please ensure no substantial (huge) spacing gaps between the individual paragraphs and references. 
Please make sure that the individual references are in alphabetical order. 

Week 3 Project
Instructions
Before beginning work on this assignment, please review the expanded grading rubric for specific instructions relating to content and formatting.
DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS
Each week, you will have the opportunity to explore an ethical theory—consequential ethics, utilitarian ethics, deontological ethics, and nonconsequential ethics—in the context of a case scenario from your textbook. In this week, the focus will be on deontological ethics.
Deontological ethics is a duty-based theory that originated from the work of Kant, which suggests that doing the right thing is important whether or not it results in the maximum good.
Tasks:
Download and save the assignment template to your computer and update the file name to include your last name.
Review the assigned case in its entirety.
Address the questions posed in detail and with appropriate scholarly support.
To support your work, use your course and textbook readings and also use the South University Online Library. As in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references for the citations in APA format.
Submission Details
By the due date assigned, submit your document to the Submissions Area.
MHA6060: Health Law
and Ethics
Week 3 Assignment
DEONTOLOGICAL
ETHICAL THEORY
Please review the following case:
At
thirty-three years of age, I was the youngest administrator in New York State
and was about to learn that adhering to company policies sometimes conflicts
with the needs of patients. In this case, it was a thirty-eight-year-old
employee who had been diagnosed with cancer. I remember the day well, even
though it was more than thirty years ago. My secretary alerted me that Carol, a
practical nurse and employee, had been admitted to the 3-North medical-surgical
week, where she worked. Without delay, I left my office and went to the nursing
week and inquired as to what room Carol was in.
Beth,
the week’s nurse manager, overheard my question. She walked up to me and asked,
“Daniel, could I please talk to you for a moment before you visit Carol?” I
looked at her and nodded my head yes, and without thought, we both walked into
her office. She closed the door and said, “As you know, we are self-insured and
the health insurance program that we have does not cover Carol’s chemotherapy
treatments. She cannot bear the cost. Is there anything you can do to help
her?” I replied that I would make an inquiry with our human resources director
to see what could be done.
Beth
asked, “Would you mind if I went with you to Carol’s room for a few minutes.”
Daniel compassionately replied, “Of course, you can.” They walked to Carol’s
room. Her husband and children had just left. Beth stayed for a few minutes
while Daniel remained behind chatting with Carol for a few moments and said he
would be back to talk with her more.
Daniel
went to speak with Christine, the human resources director for his hospital.
There were two other hospitals in the multihospital system. He explained
Carol’s financial situation and her lack of funds for her chemotherapy
treatment. Christine replied, “Daniel, this is a corporate policy that is
applicable to all three hospitals with which we must comply.” Following much
discussion, Daniel said, “Christine, Carol is an employee, and I realize there
are conflicting duties here.
One is
to follow corporate policy or choose to do, as I see it, what is right for
Carol. If you prefer, I can request an exception to the rule. To me, right
trumps duty.” Christine looked at Daniel and said, “Daniel, I will see what I
can do. I have a good relationship with the corporate vice president for human
resources. If anyone can make an exception, he can make it happen. I know you
would do the same for me or any other employee.”
Please address the following
questions drawing support from your course resources and credible scholarly
resources cited in APA format:
1.      Discuss at least three potential
long-term effects of granting an exception for Carol.
2.      Justify the position that doing
the right thing is always more important that maximizing good and defend the
argument that “right trumps duty.” Be sure to provide examples from personal or
professional scenarios.
References
Special Note
Special Instruction/Notes for the Project:
Research is required for each section (a minimum of/at least three different citations per section). Note that the rubric calls for explicit research. At least three separate academic citations/sources per section!
Please show where all bullet points start and end.
Please provide a well-defined conclusion. All submissions are to have a conclusion. 
Please provide three pages explaining and answering the questions.
Please ensure no substantial (huge) spacing gaps between the individual paragraphs and references. 
Please make sure that the individual references are in alphabetical order. 

Week 2 Project
Instructions
Before beginning work on this assignment, please review the expanded grading rubric for specific instructions relating to content and formatting.
UTILITARIAN ETHICS
Each week, you will have the opportunity to explore an ethical theory—consequential ethics, utilitarian ethics, deontological ethics, and nonconsequential ethics—in the context of a case scenario from your textbook. In this week, the focus will be on utilitarian ethics.
Utilitarian ethics is a result-based theory that says the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its ability to maximize happiness or pleasure for all.
Tasks:
Download and save the assignment template to your computer and update the file name to include your last name.
Review the assigned case in its entirety.
Address the questions posed in detail and with appropriate scholarly support.
To support your work, use your course and textbook readings and also use the South University Online Library. As in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references for the citations in APA format.
Submission Details
By the due date assigned, submit your document to the Submissions Area.
MHA6060: Health Law
and Ethics
Week 2 Assignment
UTILITARIAN ETHICAL
THEORY
Please review the following case:
Daniel
was the last of the five interviewees for the CEO’s position at Anytown Medical
Center. During the interview, a member of the finance committee asked, “Daniel,
how would you maximize an allocation of $100,000 to spend for improving patient
care, besides the capital budget and construction projects?” Bishop Paul, the
board chairman, added, “Daniel, think about the question. I will give you five
minutes to form an answer.” Daniel responded, “Bishop Paul, I am ready to
answer your question.” The trustees looked somewhat surprised, as Bishop Paul
with a smile quickly responded, “You may proceed with your answer.”
Daniel
replied, “An old Chinese proverb came to my mind as quickly as the question was
asked: ‘Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and
you feed him for a lifetime.’ You are interviewing me as the CEO of your
hospital. I see my job is to assure you that employees are thoroughly trained
to care for the patients whom the hospital serves. I will maximize the value of
each and every dollar by determining the skill sets that the staff is lacking
and retrain the staff in the areas where deficiencies are noted.”
Bishop
Paul looked around the long oval table at the trustees, “This has been a long
day and a grueling interview process for Daniel. Are there any other questions
you would like to ask him?” There was silence, as the trustees nodded their
heads no. Bishop Paul looked at Daniel and thanked him for his interest in
becoming the hospital’s next CEO.
Bishop
Paul smiled and turned his swivel chair around as Daniel was walking toward the
exit and asked, “Daniel, could you not leave the building just yet. If you
could just wait outside the room and have a seat in the doctors’ lounge area.”
After about twenty minutes, a trustee went into the lounge where Daniel was
sitting and asked him to return to the boardroom. As he entered the room,
Bishop Paul stood up and looked at Daniel straight in his eyes and said,
“Daniel, you were the last to be interviewed because you were on the “short
list” of candidates selected to be interviewed.
Speaking
for the board, your response to the last question was merely icing on the cake,
confirming our interest in you joining our staff. Both the Board of Trustees
and members of the Medical Executive Committee unanimously have recommended you
as our CEO, with which I unconditionally concur. “Welcome to Anytown Hospital.”
The trustees stood and clapped their hands. The bishop turned to the trustees
and said, “Wow, that’s a first!”
Please address the following
questions drawing support from your course resources and credible scholarly
resources cited in APA format:
1.      Summarize the main tenets of
utilitarian theory of ethics and discuss how Daniel’s response to the trustee’s
question of how he would spend the $100,000 fits the utilitarian theory of
ethics.
2.      Assess whether other theories of
ethics also apply here and provide a comparison and justification for at least
one other theory—consequential, deontological, or nonconsequential.
3.      Discuss if Daniel, metaphorically
speaking, succeeded in maximizing happiness in the eyes of the board.
References
Special Note
Special Instruction/Notes for the Project:
Research is required for each section (a minimum of/at least three different citations per section). Note that the rubric calls for explicit research. At least three separate academic citations/sources per section!
Please show where all bullet points start and end.
Please provide a well-defined conclusion. All submissions are to have a conclusion. 
Please provide three pages explaining and answering the questions.
Please ensure no substantial (huge) spacing gaps between the individual paragraphs and references. 
Please make sure that the individual references are in alphabetical order. 

This case deals with the unique challenges sometimes faced in healthcare where technology, ethics and the law intersect.    What are these challenges as presented in the case?   Discuss each “side”, their rationale, the issues at hand and the courts rationale.   I think it is very interesting to see how the legal system handles these “gray” areas that can often be controversial.   How did you feel about the case and the ruling?  Did you find yourself changing your mind as you read the case?  How do these court decisions potentially change the healthcare field/patient decisions and the future of technological/ethical/legal challenges?
300 Word Minimum