CU Nursing Confidentiality and Mental Health & Ethical Dilemmas Essay

Instructions:

Develop a solution to a specific ethical dilemma faced by a health care professional by applying ethical principles. Describe the issues and a possible solution in a paper.

1-Select one of the case studies presented

2- Summarize the facts in the selected case study and use the three components of an ethical decision-making model to analyze an ethical problem or issue and the factors that contributed to it.

• Identify which case study you selected and briefly summarize the facts surrounding it. Identify the problem or issue that presents an ethical dilemma or challenge and describe that dilemma or challenge.
• Identify who is involved or affected by the ethical problem or issue.
• Use the three components of the ethical decision-making model (moral awareness, moral judgment, and ethical behavior) to analyze the ethical issues.
• Analyze the factors that contributed to the ethical problem or issue identified in the case study.
  • Describe the factors that contributed to the problem or issue and explain how they contributed.

3-Apply academic peer-reviewed journal articles relevant to an ethical problem or issue as evidence to support an analysis of the case.

Develop a solution to a specific ethical dilemma faced by a health care professional. Before you complete the instructions detailed in the courseroom, first select one of the ethical dilemmas below to be the focus of your assessment.

Case Study: Confidentiality and Mental Health

Dr. Laura Simmons, a licensed clinical psychologist, has been treating Mr. Alex Turner, a 35-year-old software engineer, for symptoms of severe depression and anxiety over the past six months. Their sessions have been characterized by trust and open communication, with Alex often sharing his deepest fears and concerns.

During a particularly intense session, Alex reveals to Dr. Simmons that he has been having recurring thoughts of harming a colleague due to a longstanding professional rivalry and recent personal conflicts. He describes detailed plans and expresses a genuine intent to act on these thoughts.

Dr. Simmons is immediately faced with an ethical dilemma. She values the principle of confidentiality, which is foundational to the therapeutic relationship. Alex has trusted her with his innermost thoughts, and she knows that breaking this trust could potentially harm their therapeutic alliance. However, she is also bound by the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. Beneficence compels her to act in the best interest of her patient and those around him, while non-maleficence emphasizes the importance of “doing no harm.”

Case Study: Resource Allocation and Justice

St. Helena Hospital, located in a densely populated urban area, is facing an unprecedented challenge. A sudden outbreak of a rare respiratory virus has overwhelmed the hospital’s Intensive Care Unit (ICU). With only five ventilators available and ten critically ill patients in need, the healthcare team is faced with a heart-wrenching decision.

Dr. Caroline Mitchell, the Chief Medical Officer, convenes an emergency meeting with her core team: Dr. James Rodriguez, a pulmonologist; Nurse Hannah Green, the ICU head nurse; and Dr. Lisa Wong, an ethicist. They must decide how to allocate their limited ventilators.

Among the ten patients are:Mr. Alberto Garcia, a 50-year-old teacher with three children, ages 16, 18, and 22.Mrs. Emily Foster, an 80-year-old retired nurse who has been a pillar in her community.Mr. David Kim, a 40-year-old researcher working on groundbreaking medical technology.Ms. Sarah O’Brien, a 20-year-old single mother and the sole caregiver to her two disabled children, ages 2 and 5.

The team grapples with the principle of justice, aiming to ensure that all patients are treated fairly and equitably. They consider a first-come-first-serve approach but recognize its inherent flaws. They also discuss allocating based on age, societal contribution, or potential future contributions, but each criterion presents its own set of ethical challenges.

Beneficence, the principle of doing good, pushes the team to consider which patients might benefit most from the ventilator and have the highest chances of recovery. Conversely, non-maleficence, or “do no harm,” raises questions about the potential suffering some patients might endure even with the aid of a ventilator.