Case Study 8:
Amitesh and Princy recently married and lucky enough to join same Software company as engineers, under a same team leader, but they have signed a contract with the company. The team leader has started flirting with Amitesh’s wife and also started giving trouble to Amitesh in terms of putting him under lot of work related pressure. Amitesh is now asking Princy to leave the job and stay at home. Princy is just friendly with the team leader, and she thinks he is harmless. Though she has told Amitesh about this and Amitesh wants her to leave the job at any cost. After few months Princy got promotion whereas Amitesh didn’t. She is made team leader of another team and reports to manager who was her former team leader. These developments have further depressed Amitesh and lately he has started doubting his wife. However, Princy has always been faithful to Amitesh.
If you were in Amitesh’s and Princy’s place, what would you do respectively? (200 Words)
Solution:–
As Amitesh, I would like to openly convey to my wife about the insecurities I feel in her interaction with her boss and her subsequent promotion. I would also like to say to her I trust her lot and would only want good for her and was happy that she had got promotion, but I dint really trust the intent of her boss (my former TL) and therefore I would like her to trust me in my feelings and stay away from him since it was probably sending a wrong message to him, who was misinterpreting her friendly nature and also as it was damaging our personal relations due to my insecurities, if she wasn’t ready to leave the job, as it would be best possible outcome.
As Princy I would make my husband understand about my nature and my friendliness, which didn’t mean anything more apart from just that. I would address my husband’s insecurities by listening to him patiently and understanding it in the Light of my recent promotion, it would only complicate his thought process. Since I would not like to leave the job I would for one trust my husband and keep my interactions with boss to only professional level since it would inspire confidence in my husband. However to address his deeper bias against me I would give him a plain talk about my freedom, Integrity and choices, and the fact that his distrust will not help matters hence he should be more open to me interacting with male counterparts without any bias.
,
The ethical dilemma faced by the physician in this case is whether to continue treating a patient who is terminally ill and has requested that he not be resuscitated if he stops breathing. The physician is aware that if he does not resuscitate the patient, the patient will die. However, he is also aware that if he does resuscitate the patient, the patient will likely suffer a great deal of pain and discomfort. The physician must weigh the patient’s right to die with his own duty to provide care.
The ethical principles involved in this case include autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and Justice. Autonomy is the principle that individuals have the right to make their own decisions about their own lives. Beneficence is the principle that physicians should act in the best interests of their patients. Non-maleficence is the principle that physicians should do no harm to their patients. Justice is the principle that individuals should be treated fairly.
The potential consequences of the physician’s decision include the following:
- If the physician does not resuscitate the patient, the patient will die.
- If the physician does resuscitate the patient, the patient will likely suffer a great deal of pain and discomfort.
- The physician may be sued by the patient’s family if the patient dies.
- The physician may be disciplined by the medical board if he does not resuscitate the patient.
The physician’s responsibility to the patient is to provide care that is in the patient’s best interests. The physician must respect the patient’s right to make his own decisions about his own life. The physician must also be aware of the potential consequences of his decision.
The physician’s responsibility to the healthcare system is to provide care that is in the best interests of the healthcare system. The physician must be aware of the potential costs and benefits of his decision. The physician must also be aware of the potential impact of his decision on other patients and healthcare providers.
The physician’s responsibility to Society is to provide care that is in the best interests of society. The physician must be aware of the potential impact of his decision on the public’s perception of the healthcare system. The physician must also be aware of the potential impact of his decision on the public’s perception of physicians.
In this case, the physician must weigh the patient’s right to die with his own duty to provide care. The physician must also consider the potential consequences of his decision on the patient, the healthcare system, and society. The physician must make a decision that is in the best interests of the patient, the healthcare system, and society.
The physician could choose to resuscitate the patient, even though the patient has requested not to be resuscitated. The physician could make this decision based on the principle of beneficence, which states that physicians should act in the best interests of their patients. The physician could believe that it is in the patient’s best interests to be resuscitated, even though the patient has requested not to be resuscitated.
The physician could also choose to not resuscitate the patient, even though the patient has requested to be resuscitated. The physician could make this decision based on the principle of autonomy, which states that individuals have the right to make their own decisions about their own lives. The physician could believe that it is in the patient’s best interests to be allowed to die, even though the patient has requested to be resuscitated.
The physician could also choose to consult with the patient’s family before making a decision. The physician could discuss the patient’s wishes with the family and get their input on what they believe is in the patient’s best interests. The physician could then make a decision based on the patient’s wishes and the family’s input.
The physician could also choose to refer the patient to a palliative care team. A palliative care team is a team of healthcare professionals who specialize in providing care for patients who are terminally ill. The palliative care team could help the patient and the physician make a decision about whether or not to resuscitate the patient.
The physician could also choose to consult with an ethics committee. An ethics committee is a group of healthcare professionals who are experts in medical ethics. The ethics committee could help the physician make a decision about whether or not to resuscitate the patient.
The physician must make a decision that is in the best
448s170.8 0 213.4-11.5c23.5-6.3 42-24.2 48.3-47.8 11.4-42.9 11.4-132.3 11.4-132.3s0-89.4-11.4-132.3zm-317.5 213.5V175.2l142.7 81.2-142.7 81.2z"/> Subscribe on YouTube