Morris v. City Of Colorado Springs
DO YOU WANT TO EXCEL IN MORRIS V. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS ASSIGNMENT – ORDER AT EXPERTSMINDS!
Question 1: What are the facts of the case? This should include: what do we need to know, who is involved in the situation, where does the ethical situation take place, and when does it occur?
Answer: The facts of the case are that a nurse named Sonja Morris has sued a case against the Memorial Hospital on account of facing harassment by Dr. Bryan Mahan who during an open surgery has tossed the 4-by-6-inch piece of tissue on 28th August 2008 and chuckled while doing it. He even made a joke by saying "Oh (expletive), I hit her. Can we get cultures on that?", due to which she felt humiliated and other surgeons laughed over it. Sonja Morris was a practicing nurse since 1999 and she has joined the cardiac team in October 2007 (Morris v. City of Colorado Springs, 2012). The defendant of the case is Dr. Bryan Mahan who is the Chairman of cardiac and thoracic medicine in the hospital. Initially, the nurse complained in the hospital, for which no necessary action was taken, after which she filed a plea in the Court and immediately, she was transferred to the main operating unit, mentioning that the position was quite prestigious to work in Cardiac department. She also moved her to complain by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, who mentioned she faced a hostile environment due to her gender. She was even demoted from her current position after filing and suit based on the file First Amendment rights.
The ethical situation occurred during open-heart surgery, in which the doctor threw a 4-by-6-inch piece of tissue on the Nurse, who was standing 15 feet away from the operation table and all the surgeons laughed over it. She also mentioned that earlier also Dr. Mahan has hit her on the head and this incident happened twice, to which she has earlier also resisted. She constantly faced harassment and a hostile work environment, to which no action has been taken by the Hospital authorities.
Question 2: What is the precise ethical issue in regards to autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, fidelity, and justice?
Answer: In each of the principles that cover a belief, underlying ethical codes helps to understand how the ethics would be simply accounted to making decisions; along with a possibility of the principles that have been constantly been accepted by the philosophies which would aid to use and be able to guide one's own decision making. As understood, from the Autonomy principle which is simply accounted for making one own person's right that would aid in deciding his part. In this situation, the nurse and the doctor have a right to refuse to make certain decisions and some treatment that would be covered under the therapeutic or educational progress. As interpreted how the Nonmaleficenceprinciple is simply defined as a Hippocratic Oath and mentions and abides by the principle of "First, not harm." In the case, as every professional are working progressively and they needed to be screened based on the potential damage (which is the physical or emotional) accounted for the helpers. In here the doctor threw the tissue on the nurse and didn't even though his actions would result in harming someone. To cover how the rule of the beneficence(i.e., acting with the best interest to benefit clients/students) would have to also cover and be able to maximize in accordance to the choice selection. As interpreted how the Fidelity interprets as a "faithfulness," along with the basis of helping professionals that ought to do and to determine what they say and based on what they are going to do. The meaning of Veracity is defined as a truthfulness-which is interpreted as truthiness and would be examined based on the helpers that need to equally be honest along with abiding by the limitations that can help others. Lastly, justice is associated to be fair and justified.
SAVE YOUR HIGHER GRADE WITH ACQUIRING MORRIS V. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS ASSIGNMENT HELP & QUALITY HOMEWORK WRITING SERVICES OF EXPERTSMINDS.COM!
Question 3: Identify the major principles, rules, and values of the case. Values are sets of beliefs about good and bad, right and wrong, and about many other aspects of living and interacting in the society with others. A principle is a personal rule that governs personal behavior. A rule is generally imposed by a figure of authority, and used to guide and govern people.
Answer: The major principles applied for the given case are the Nonmaleficence, Autonomy principle and lastly the veracity, which is missing in the case. Even if the values and the rules direct that all the health professionals need to have healthy interactions and should not misuse their ethics and positions, but still in the case, it was evident, how the Doctor was constantly harassing the nurse and exploiting her fidelity principle.
Question 4: Is there legal ground for this case, if so what? Who is at fault? What legal action should be taken?
Answer: Yes there holds a legal ground and Doctor would be held accountable based on the rules of ethics and the value add principles. The doctor has breached and violated the U.S. Equal employment opportunity and nurse are exploited, harassed and constantly faced victimized after working alongside with me. The doctor should be penalized and if he continues this type of unethical practice, his license should also be suspended.
Question 5: Are there alternative to the actions completed in this case by both the nurse, physician, and healthcare facility? Do you feel the physician and nurse were following hospital protocol?
Answer: The nurse was following her protocols, but the doctor was not ethical. Due to his position, he was exploiting and mistreating the nurse, whom he thought, he holds right to misuse his power and position. The hospital facility turned blind while seeing this situation and didn't even enact when the nurse constantly complained and filed a complaint. As an action, they demoted and shifted her to a close operation unit. Alternative education is to make the physician and healthcare facility go through the ethical principle training set up and should be educated to respect all under one platform.
Question 6: If you were a member of the ethics committee at this facility, what actions or changes would you recommend changing? Why?
Answer: As an ethical committee person, I would have ensured a legal action against the Doctor and would have enacted to contact other surgeons as part of the team to gain more insights. Also, everything should have been documented and filed, for future reference (Ensslin, 2009).
GET GUARANTEED SATISFACTION OR MONEY BACK UNDER MORRIS V. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS ASSIGNMENT HELP SERVICES OF EXPERTSMINDS.COM – ORDER TODAY NEW COPY OF THIS ASSIGNMENT!