PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis
Grand Canyon University PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis– Step-By-Step Guide
This guide will demonstrate how to complete the Grand Canyon University PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.
How to Research and Prepare for PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis
Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Grand Canyon University PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.
After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.
How to Write the Introduction for PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis
The introduction for the Grand Canyon University PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.
Need a high-quality paper urgently?
We can deliver within hours.
How to Write the Body for PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis
After the introduction, move into the main part of the PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.
Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.
How to Write the Conclusion for PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis
After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.
How to Format the References List for PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis
The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.
Stuck? Let Us Help You
Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease.
Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW.
Sample Answer for PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis
Part 1:
Bioethics is the study of ethical issues that occur in medicine. The four main ethical principles are beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. In the provided case study, James is diagnosed with acute glomerulonephritis kidney failure. He presents with high blood pressure and fluid buildup, necessitating temporary dialysis. The attending physician recommends immediate dialysis, but James’ parents, Mike and Joanne, opt first to attend faith healing services. James is later brought in a deteriorated state and will now require a kidney transplant. The purpose of this assignment is to discuss ethical principles as they relate to the case and the Christian worldview.
| Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence | Patient Preferences Autonomy |
| Medical indications include interventions that seek to meet a patient’s needs.Beneficence is the moral duty to do good. Providers have an ethical duty to do good and act in the patient’s best interest (Fowler & Schoonover-Shoffner, 2023).Nonmaleficence is the moral obligation to cause no harm to the patient.It requires the healthcare provider not deliberately to harm or injure a patient. The two principles are applied in healthcare decision-making (Fowler & Schoonover-Shoffner, 2023). They require healthcare providers to bear in mind the potential risks and benefits of any medical indication in patient care.In the case scenario, dialysis is a medical indication for fluid buildup.The physician acted in the best interest of James by recommending dialysis to alleviate the fluid buildup, which could worsen his condition, which upholds beneficence and nonmaleficence.James’ father demonstrates nonmaleficence when he expresses concerns about Samuel donating a kidney since it can have health consequences. | Autonomy refers to a patient having the final decision-making responsibility for their treatment. Patient preferences are often based on an individual’s past experiences, cultural beliefs, and values (Fowler & Schoonover-Shoffner, 2023).Respect for autonomy involves obtaining consent from competent patients to proceed with a medical intervention. The physician upheld respect for autonomy when he engaged James’ parents and explained the available treatment options to them.The physician also seeks consent from James’ parents to initiate treatment since James is a child. The physician also respects Mike’s preference of delaying dialysis first to attend a spiritual healing service. The nephrologist also upholds autonomy by engaging James’ father in discussing having Samuel donate a kidney. |
| Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy | Contextual Features Justice and Fairness |
| Quality of life (QoL) is the level of satisfaction that individuals experience and value about their lives.Beneficence and nonmaleficence influence a patient’s QoL.The provider cannot satisfy the criterion of avoiding harm to the patient and acting in the patient’s best interest without respecting their autonomy (Fowler & Schoonover-Shoffner, 2023).The physician is concerned about James’ health and QoL and thus recommends immediate dialysis to improve symptoms. Similarly, the nephrologist proposes a kidney transplant, which would improve James’ condition and overall quality of life, considering that he cannot be on dialysis his entire life.Mike conveys concerns about the QoL of Samuel if he donates a kidney to James. He is worried that the kidney donation might affect Samuel’s QoL due to potential complications. | Contextual features refer to patient-specific factors like family dynamics, finances, religion, or culture influencing decision-making. Religious factors influenced Mike to delay James from having immediate dialysis, and they initially preferred attending faith-healing services.Justice is an ethical principle that entails maximizing benefits to patients and society while putting emphasis on fairness, equality, and impartiality (Fowler & Schoonover-Shoffner, 2023).The physician upholds justice and fairness by initiating treatment for James when he returns in a critical state.James’ was in dire need of dialysis at this point, and the available resources were channeled to his treatment, which upholds justice. |
ALSO READ:
PHI 413 Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis
PHI 413 Death and Dying: Case Analysis
Part 2: Evaluation
Answer each of the following questions about how the four principles approach and four boxes approach would be applied:
- In 200-250 words, answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how would each of the principles be specified in this case? Explain why. (45 points)
| The Christian worldview would define autonomy as an individual with a sound mind having a right to decide what will be done to their body. Christians believe it is not the physician’s responsibility to decide what will be done to an individual (White, 2020). For example, the physician may recommend surgery, but the individual eventually must make the final decision. Autonomy is, to some degree, protective of the Christian. In an ideal world, if a person is treated by a physician who respects the patient’s autonomy, a Christian can make decisions that honor God. Beneficence and nonmaleficence would be viewed by Christians as the physician acting in the patient’s best interest and avoiding doing harm. Christians believe physicians should uphold the two principles by showing compassion when caring for patients (White, 2020). This follows in the footsteps of Jesus Christ, who was compassionate to the sick in society. Lastly, the Christian worldview would describe Justice as the appropriate allocation of scarce resources. Most of the debates in the media and the government when facing limited healthcare resources are related to the principle of justice. Christians are encouraged to advocate for the enactment of just policies by policymakers (White, 2020). Besides, Christian healthcare professionals are encouraged to act justly when dealing with patients from all walks of life. Christians are further encouraged to act just or fair way, which should characterize their lives. |
- In 200-250 words, answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian weigh and balance each of the four principles in this case? Explain why. (45 points)
| A Christian can weigh and balance the four ethical principles that apply to this case by determining the one that will preserve the patient’s life and help James live a comfortable life with minimal symptoms. Although Christians believe that a person should be granted autonomy with the right to make medical decisions, they also believe that one should not make decisions that will endanger one’s life. Christians believe the decision promoting the best outcome possible should be implemented even though it is not the patient’s final decision (White, 2020). Even though Christians may consider James’ parents as having the responsibility to make the final decisions regarding his treatment, they would expect the parents to make the decision that will help improve James’ health. Therefore, beneficence and nonmaleficence would have a heavier weight. Christians would also expect the parents and the physicians to act in the best interest of James’ health. A Christian may recommend that Mike and Joanne be provided with detailed information on the pros and cons of each medical option (White, 2020). Educating individuals about medical options is a way of respecting their autonomy. This empowers them to make the best treatment option while considering their beliefs and values. Furthermore, a Christian would advocate for healthcare resources to be availed and made accessible to those who need them most to improve their health outcomes. |
Conclusion
Beneficence and nonmaleficence take into account the balance of risks versus benefits and benefits over burdens. Autonomy is upheld when the healthcare provider involves the patient in decision-making and respects the patient’s preferences. The physician and nephrologist upheld beneficence and nonmaleficence by recommending treatment options to improve James’ condition. They also upheld autonomy by engaging Mike and Joanne in discussions about treatment options for James and respecting their decisions. The Christian worldview would recommend allowing James’ parents to make decisions about his treatment but expect them to make the decision that will not endanger his life.
References
Fowler, M. D., & Schoonover-Shoffner, K. (2023). Rising to “The Highest Morals”—The Rich History of Nursing Ethics. Journal of Christian Nursing, 40(2), 86–95.
White, N. (2020). Practicing dignity: An introduction to Christian values and decision making in health care. Retrieved from https://lc.gcumedia.com/phi413v/practicing-dignity-an-introduction-to-christian-values-and-decision-making-in-health-care/v1.1/#/home
Sample Answer 2 for PHI 413 Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative: Case Analysis
Topic 3: Applying the Four Principles: Case Study
Part 1: Chart (60 points)
Based on the reading of the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and topic Resources, use the four boxes approach to organize relevant ethical issues related to the four principles (beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect for autonomy, and justice). Provide the information by means of bullet points with complete sentences in the box. Gather as much data as possible.
| Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence | Patient Preferences Autonomy |
| The patient’s condition need an immediate medical solution.The physician recommended that James be placed under dialysis immediately to help prevent potential complications that could come due to kidney failure.Therefore, beneficence was observed as a timely medical intervention was sought. Indeed, evidence show that a timely medical intervention can lead to better outcomes among patients with acute glomerulonephritis (Wang et al.,2020).There were nonmaleficence concerns when the patient’s parent at first decided that their child should go for faith healing and not medical management.Such a decision led to further deterioration of the patient’s health, with such a delay further raising ethical concerns regarding the patient potentially having a worse condition or being harmed.The eventual situation where the patient needed a kidney transplant underpinned the importance of nonmaleficence, as the need arose due to delayed treatment. | James is a minor and, hence, could not make decisions regarding the care approach (Molina-Mula & Gallo-Estrada, 2020). The parents, Joanne and Mike exercised autonomy and initially chose faith healing over medical intervention.Such a decision was influenced by a recent church sermon and witnessing how a friend was healed during the healing service.Such a decision negatively impacted James’s autonomy since it delayed the medical treatment that the patient promptly needed.The parents later decided to pursue the medical management approach, and the need for a kidney transplant brought up another instance requiring autonomy. The parents were faced with an ethical dilemma on whether to allow Samuel to potentially donate a kidney for his brother. |
| Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy | Contextual Features Justice and Fairness |
| The patient’s condition negatively impacted his life, which then called for immediate medical attention, which made the physician recommend dialysis initially.The patient’s condition deteriorated due to parents’ choice of faith healing, impacting his quality of life. Such a delay led to negative consequences which further highlighted the need to follow nonmaleficence and beneficence.Even though the parents initially exercised their autonomy to prioritize faith healing, the need for dialysis changed their decision-making to shift to medical intervention, which emphasized the importance of considering the patient’s well-being and quality of life alongside autonomy (McClure & Leah, 2021). | It is also important to consider justice and fairness.The parent’s initial decision to choose faith healing as a medical intervention was directly influenced by their religious beliefs. As such, they had a strong belief that it was fair and just to rely on their faith to help accomplish James’s healing.The justice and fairness were based on their perception that faith healing is a valid and effective approach to help heal their son while at the same time aligning with their religious convictions.Consequently, the patient’s condition deteriorated, which then required dialysis. Such a turn of events raised questions regarding the justice of delaying the treatment that the doctor recommended, as well as the effect of the delay on the patient’s well-being.There were also justice concerns as an initial decision taken by the parents led to negative impacts on James’s health.The aspect of kidney transplant also touched on the justice aspects, especially when choosing the befitting donor.There was an ethical dilemma that involved the proposal to involve the patient’s twin brother, Samuel. This consideration also raised questions regarding fairness, especially in terms of distributing the risks and burdens that may come with the kidney transplant.It is also important to evaluate the fairness involved in considering a possible impact on the brother’s autonomy and well-being. |
Part 2: Evaluation
Answer each of the following questions about how the four principles approach and four boxes approach would be applied:
- In 200-250 words, answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how would each of the principles be specified in this case? Explain why. (45 points)
| It is important to consider how each of the principles can be specified in this case according to the Christian worldview. Based on the Christian worldview, beneficence can be considered as the duty to ensure that the well-being of others is upheld. Therefore, ensuring that the patient gets medical intervention is in line with the Christian principle of life preservation and caring for the sick (Schweiker & Clairmont, 2020). Besides, non-maleficence in this case context would mean that individuals involved strive to ensure that James is not harmed in any way. However, the delay in medical treatment, as it occurred in this case, contradicts the Christian responsibility of preventing harm and suffering. Another aspect discussed was patient preferences, where autonomy was the major focus. From the Christian perspective, autonomy refers to acknowledging the patient’s and their family member’s right to decide on the course of action based on their religious beliefs. On the other hand, it would also mean that responsible decision-making, which takes into consideration the well-being of the patient, should be taken. The patient’s autonomy need to be considered in the context of parental responsibility as well as the Christian role in welfare and health prioritization. In reference to the quality of life box, beneficence in a Christian worldview would be connected to actions focused on enhancing life quality. As such, medical interventions such as kidney transplants and dialysis are in sync with the Christian principle of suffering alleviation and loving one’s neighbor. In addition, nonmaleficence, based on this view, would focus on ensuring that the patient experiences no harm, while autonomy would mean responsible decision-making that enhances James’ well-being. In reference to contextual features, justice, and fairness, the Christian worldview focuses on a fair distribution of resources such as medical care (Arthur, 2021). As such, the proposal of considering Samuel as a potential donor denotes familial responsibility of resource sharing as well as sacrificial love for a family member. |
- In 200-250 words, answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian weigh and balance each of the four principles in this case? Explain why. (45 points)
| The four principles are all important. However, there is a need to balance all the four principles to ensure that the individuals have an overall good health. It is important to explore ways of weighing and balancing each of the four principles in this case. In reference to beneficence, the Christian worldview would dictate that the patient’s well-being is promoted. Therefore, ensuring that the patient gets timely medical attention, such as dialysis and later kidney transplant, would be considered an expression of compassion and love for others, which also aligns with the duty to take of the sick. When it comes to nonmaleficence, in reference to this case, it is important to ensure that harm to the patient is avoided. Even though choosing faith healing as an alternative may be seen as upholding autonomy, it can also be considered a failure to fulfill the Christian responsibility of preventing suffering and promoting good health (Butts & Rich, 2022). However, ensuring effective and prompt medical care would be the best way to ensure nonmaleficence. Autonomy should be balanced with responsible decision-making, which is part of a Christian worldview. Therefore, based on this case, autonomy would have been exercised within the framework of fulfilling the parental duties with Christian values as the base but not considered absolute. Justice would entail a fair distribution of resources and responsibilities. Proposing the brother as a potential donor is an indication of love, which demonstrates Christ-like love, a love that made him sacrifice his life for human beings. |
References
Arthur, J. (2021). A Christian Education in the Virtues: Character formation and human flourishing (p. 200). Taylor & Francis.
Butts, J. B., & Rich, K. L. (2022). Nursing ethics: Across the curriculum and into practice. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
McClure, J., & Leah, C. (2021). Is independence enough? Rehabilitation should include autonomy and social engagement to achieve quality of life. Clinical Rehabilitation, 35(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215520954344
Molina-Mula, J., & Gallo-Estrada, J. (2020). Impact of nurse-patient relationship on quality of care and patient autonomy in decision-making. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3), 835. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17030835
Schweiker, W., & Clairmont, D. A. (2020). Religious Ethics: Meaning and Method. John Wiley & Sons.
Wang, Y., Zhou, T., Zhang, Q., Fei, Y., Li, Z., Li, S., … & Wang, N. (2020). Poor renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with biopsy-proven diabetic nephropathy. Kidney and Blood Pressure Research, 45(3), 378-390. https://doi.org/10.1159/000505919