Ethics, case scenario assignment

Morality generally refers to a person’s personal standards of behaviour as well as values and lifestyle (Thompson, Melia et al. 2006 p 13). When we look at ethical issues ourselves, we generally reflect our own life experiences, attitudes and cultures. Our actions and decisions may therefore embody implicit theories of ethics (Kerridge, Lowe et al. 2009 p10). Deontology is known as one of the major schools of moral philosophy and is known as intrinsicalism due to the fact that it embodies the concept that things or actions are right or wrong in and of themselves (Kerridge, Lowe et al. 009 p10). Consequentialist theory is that the rightness and wrongness of an action is based exclusively on the consequences of doing it; the right act is defined as that which leads to the best consequences (Kerridge, Lowe et al. 2009 p11). The tension between different types of ethical theories has contributed hugely on the growth of moral philosophy, such as deontology and consequentialist, yet all theories have significant theoretical and methodological deficiencies (Kerridge, Lowe et al. 2009 p36).

Beauchamp (1982 as cited in Austin 2007 p81) believes that moral philosophers are yet to link their theories to authentic problems. According to Beauchamp and Walters (1982 cited in Thompson, Melia et al. 2006 p179) respect for personal autonomy is a fundamental ethical principle. Autonomy as defined by Kerridge, Lowe and Stewart (2009) is self determination, liberty, rights and ‘ free will’. There are many theories and definitions of autonomy but most all generally make reference to individual liberty or independence, and the capacity for intentional or rational action (Kerridge, Lowe et al. 009 p83). It appears that Mr. Collins autonomy remains intact and can therefore have the right to make a decision regarding this. This basically means that Mr. Collins should be free to choose and is entitled to act on his preferences, provided that his decisions and actions do not stand to violate, or impinge on, the significant moral interests of others. In accordance with the respecting autonomy principle, it is wrong for Roma to violate Mr. Collins considered and autonomous choice about continuing to have a beer with his son.

Collins to drink thickened fluids only to minimise the risks associated with drinking unthickened beer. Value statement 6 (ANMC 2005) also supports that Roma will play a key role in the detection and prevention of errors and adverse events in health care settings, and support and participate in systems to identify circumstances where Mr. Collins is at risk of harm. Roma will act to prevent or control such risks through prevention, monitoring, early identification and early management of adverse events (ANMC 2005).

In accordance with this, Roma has identified that there are risks associated with Mr. Collins drinking beer and by stopping him from doing so will prevent further harm to him. Also by putting a stop to drinking the beer Roma will no longer have impaired ability to deliver quality care due to the fact that Mr. Collins is engaging in activities that Roma knows is a risk to his condition. Another point to take into consideration is the fact that Mr. Collins states that he has spoken to the doctor and the speech therapist about the risks involved if he continues to drink beer, unthickened.