IndexEthical DecisionsConclusionReferencesTony, who is 67 years old and competent, has been diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer. He admits to the hospital staff that he does not want any treatment and informs them that he has already signed an advanced medical directive (AMD). This means he does not want any resuscitation or any treatment that would prolong his life as his Christian religion requires him to die with dignity. However, his wife and daughter opposed his decision and asked the doctor to offer him a treatment that would prolong his life. The doctor is therefore torn between refusing the life-prolonging treatment and administering it according to the family's request. The ethical issues in this case concern autonomy, non-maleficence and utility. In this essay, decision making will be applied to resolve the dilemma and discuss the implications of the issue for nursing practice. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Ethical Decision Making As noted by Rubulotta and Rubulotta (2013), the issue of resuscitation has always produced ethical dilemmas in healthcare due to the need to respect patient autonomy, subject to the principle of non-maleficence. Respecting patient autonomy requires that patients' decision regarding their desired healthcare intervention be respected (Avasthi, Ghosh, Sarkar, & Grover, 2013). This implies that the doctor should respect Tony's decision not to be resuscitated regardless of what his wife and daughter want. Since Tony is competent, the decision he makes should be the one that guides the doctor's actions. If the doctor administered life-prolonging treatment as requested by Tony's wife and daughter, he would violate Tony's autonomy. However, the positive benefits of resuscitation such as restoration of life are something considered by most physicians (Marco, n.d.). (The in-text citation must have dates. It cannot "nd.") Such benefits create a conflict between autonomy and nonmaleficence, which dictates that no harm should be done to patients. However, literature shows that resuscitation drains family members' finances and resources and causes the patient to live a suboptimal life (Ahmed, Mudasser, Khan, & Abdoun, 2016). Therefore, the doctor should respect Tony's decision not to give him life-prolonging treatment. There is also an ethical conflict between autonomy and utilitarianism. The principle of utility states that the best action should be the one that maximizes the greatest possible benefits for the greatest number of individuals (Mandal, Ponnambath, & Parija, 2016). Following the principle of utility, the doctor should heed the request of Tony's wife and daughter because in this way; net benefits will be maximized. This is in the sense that Tony's resuscitation will bring happiness to his wife, his daughter, and another family member whose wish is to see Tony last longer. On the other hand, not resuscitating Tony will only benefit him, causing harm to his family members and the doctor whose relationship with Tony's family members, who are potential clients, will be ruined. As noted by Adams, Bailey, Anderson, and Docherty (2011), during end-of-life decisions, it is important for the clinician to develop and maintain trusting relationships with the client's family members. From this perspective, not resuscitating Tony would ruin the doctor's relationship with his family. Therefore, to maximize the benefits, the doctor should preserve Tony's life. In choosing the best course of action for the doctor, it will be important to refer to the patient's rights that have beenstipulated during the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. According to WHO (2018), the information model of patients' rights states that patients are the best judges of their own interests and should therefore make their own decisions. To ensure that they make the best decision, the doctor should provide them with sufficient information. With respect to this right, the doctor should respect Tony's decision not to be resuscitated or to undergo treatment to prolong his life. The fact that Tony has already signed an advanced medical directive means that he is in the right state of mind for her and has every right to make decisions regarding her health. Therefore, the doctor should ensure that he does not violate his rights by doing what his wife and daughter ask. Doctors have an obligation to provide patient-centered care to patients. This means that their services should align with and respect the patient's preferences, values, and interests (Ogden, Barr, & Greenfield, 2017). If the doctor chooses to listen to Tony's wife and daughter, he will have violated his obligation to provide patient-centered care. In light of this obligation, the doctor has a responsibility to respect Tony's decision and only offer him services that keep him pain-free and comfortable. The doctor should also respect Tony's Christian values ​​and let him die in the way he deems dignified. Following this discussion, the benefits of not resuscitating Tony outweigh those of resuscitating him as proposed by his wife and daughter. Therefore, based on IDEA's ethical decision making process, the doctor's best action would be to grant Tony's request and let him go home. Letting Tony go home; the doctor will respect the ethical decision of the patient's autonomy. (the phrase "going home refers to death, not home" needs to be changed). Additionally, the physician will have retained the obligation to provide patient-centered care. This means that he will have respected Tony's preference to receive only painless treatment, and also his Christian values ​​of dying with dignity. Communication with family members about the decision should be done in a way that improves their satisfaction. Therefore, according to Caswell, Pollock, Harwood, and Porock (2015), good communication plays a vital role in preventing psychological distress within family members. Therefore, the doctor should inform them of the decision not to resuscitate him citing the reasons why the decision was made. They should understand why Tony's decision trumps their decision. The implementation should be documented, with regular monitoring to ensure Tony remains comfortable and pain-free. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Conclusion Decisions about resuscitation and life-prolonging treatment pose several ethical questions for healthcare providers. To ensure they address these ethical dilemmas effectively, nurses should understand nursing ethical principles and code of conduct. This understanding will ensure that nursing actions and decisions are in line with professional conduct and will prevent cases where nurses are held responsible for negligence in their profession. Tony's case states why nurses should be familiar with ethical principles. Case analysis impacts nursing practice by challenging nurses to ensure that all nursing actions are in line with legal and ethical principles, so as to prevent legal charges from patients. The case helped me understand that in some situations nurses lack awareness., &/