Case Study Analysis Paper

Comments on the Case Study Analysis by Two People

Case Study Analysis Paper

Comments on the Case Study Analysis by Two People

Response 1

In the first response to the case analysis, the writer first notes that the actions of the physician are unethical. The response also recognizes that the physician had an obligation to both George and his wife, as well. This is one responsibility of physicians in their practice, which they should never forget. From the two statements, one knows that the physician failed in conducting the right procedure of giving the wife information that affects her directly.

Failing to tell George that his wife needed to know about the condition before treatment, was quite unethical since one has a right to know for what a physician is treating them. The writer recognizes that physicians are supposed to offer their patients informed consent before proceeding with any treatment. From the first few statements, the reader can realize that the writer’s main point is about informed consent on the part of physicians, that is part of their responsibility.

More so, the response has reckoned that physicians have an obligation to prevention of the spreading of any disease. By not telling, the wife such information, it is a sure way of failing in prevention of spreading of a disease, which is unethical and causes harm to the parties involved. Here, the writer makes another important point for the reader.

The response provides a strong point on informed consent by physicians and its likely implications.

Get quality help now

KarrieWrites

Verified

Proficient in: Case Study

5 (339)

“ KarrieWrites did such a phenomenal job on this assignment! He completed it prior to its deadline and was thorough and informative. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

I agree with the writer on the issue at hand, where the response has shown the unethical practices of the physician as well as why they were unethical. This provides the reader with information about how such ethics applies in different case scenarios.

Response 2

From the second response provides a broad statement at the start about confidentiality in healthcare practice that raises many issues concerning patient care. The writer starts expounding on the broad statement by reckoning that it is the fundamental principle that comes from the right of patients in making informed decisions (Lees & Godbold, 2012). This provides a good point on the issue at hand. The writer proceeds to give a personal opinion on issues relating to disclosing of people with HIV condition. The writer prompts on to make more specific points in the response that provide the reader with a deeper understanding of different issues with confidentiality matters including record keeping of HIV patients.

The writer further gives a strong opinion on what physicians should do in order to enhance better healthcare and prevention of spread of diseases by saying that they are supposed to ensure a good environment to foster healthcare practices. Additionally, the writer cites that it is the responsibility of physicians to make it easy for patients to cooperate in prevention of diseases through including them fully.

Response # 9

In this response, the writer first recognizes that physicians have a responsibility of protecting patient’s information through ensuring confidentiality. The write also recognizes that this is in accordance with the HIPAA laws. Using in text citations or referring to other professionals is a sure way of showing the credibility of the information provided, which makes the response quite credible since it provides proof.

In this response, the writer has provided substantial amount of information on ethics surrounding healthcare where physicians have an obligation as well as a limit. In this case, the writer clearly indicates that the physician had no right to tell the wife about George’s health condition. A further reason is given, which is dependent on the disease except for HIV that has an exemption. This provides the reader with a good understanding of the topic in a greater way. The response further provides a good point that every patient has a right to know what he or she are being treated for, meaning the physician was unethical in treating the wife for a disease she did not know. The writer is keen enough to state that the physician was in a dilemma since both patients had rights.

One of the outstanding content of this response is the amount of information and ideas about healthcare practices and responsibilities of physicians to patients. The response has provided enough information in a smooth way to explain the case scenario, the issues behind the case, ways in which the physician failed and what should have been done. This is quite important for the reader since it adds to their understanding of the issue at hand. I agree with the ideas posed in the response.

Reference

Lees, A., & Godbold, R. (2012). To tell or not to tell? Physiotherapy students’ responses to breaking patient confidentiality. New Zealand Journal of Physiotherapy, 40(2): 59-63.