ETHICS 3
physician explanation on the severity of Joseph’s condition and how necessary was the surgery,
Joseph's Autonomy got not considered.
3
For effective overruling of Joseph's alleged wishes, it would have been better to reach out to
Joseph's family or even other significant persons who can be more conscious of Joseph's requests
and denials. However, at some point, it would not have been necessary to contact the family or
friends because of how prompt was the surgery necessary to save Joseph's life. Informing or
contacting Joseph's family would a little bit look like a hazard in breach of confidentiality of
Joseph if he did not authorize that the family or significant persons to be informed but if he
approves that the family to get contacted it will not be a breach of confidentiality hence
becoming ethically justified.
4
Carrying on the surgery by the surgeon regardless of Joseph's harmony and, definitely, in
opposition to his objections, did not make the surgeon to be guilty of dereliction of duty
(Mnenga, 2016). The reason is to he did not mean to do any harm to Joseph but to put his life out
of danger since Joseph needed the prompt Medicare because his condition required an operation
to be conducted immediately sooner than the aneurysm burst which could lead to Joseph's
possible death. According to the principle of non-maleficence, it suggests that the procedure used
in the treatment does not damage the patient involved and beneficence states that the surgeon
should undertake the operation to do good to the patient.
5
According to the physician, the surgery operation on Joseph showed to be emergent, and no time
could get wasted on it this made the need to appeal to represent of Joseph's religion to be
