VIP treatment for certain patients

One ethical issue that the healthcare system rarely speaks about is the fact that healthcare facilities aren’t treating all patients equally. Certain patients are getting the VIP treatment within a facility while others are being left behind. Elite care for VIP patients such as financial donors, trustees’ family members, and other influential people in the community can take many forms. It may result in shorter waiting times or longer physician consultations, or it could mean that the hospital administrator drops by to make sure they don’t have any problems and that their care is first-class. While ensuring the privacy of celebrities enters into the equation, consistently the hospital treats people who are wealthy, or who are donors, differently than the general public. From the viewpoint of a patient I could see how this would be very upsetting to know, but I’ve come to the realization that in America “money talks”. Unfortunately hospitals are a highly profitable business and like any other business when funds are distributed in a timely manner there’s a need to keep those customers coming back. Many American patients feel the same way like they're just a number in line at the butcher's shop. Some patients have had enough, and those who can afford it are choosing to pay hefty premiums out-of-pocket to get more personalized, more polite service. There are now more than 1,000 doctors in the U.S. who have opened concierge, or boutique, practices, according to the Society for Innovative Medical Practice Design

staff shortages in healthcare

The federal government predicts that by 2020, nurse and physician retirements will contribute to a shortage of approximately 24,000 doctors and nearly 1 million nurses. Health industry leaders are faced with the challenge of orchestrating care in an increasingly complex and converging healthcare labor market. Every healthcare institution has an ethical obligation to protect the safety of patients by providing staff in sufficient numbers and with adequate skills to deliver quality care. The ability of institutions to fulfill this obligation is compromised by the current and growing shortage of healthcare professionals and the amount of administrative time that can detract them from patient care. I feel like this issue can solved if Healthcare executives join forces with others in their service areas to address the problem of staff shortages. They should start collaborating to recruit qualified staff members together instead of competing with one another, as well as sharing staff members. For instance one hospital may have a RN shortage, the collaborating hospital could offer some qualified applicants that applied to their hospital. There are an abundance of applicants who are willing to work anywhere. Hospitals need to remember the common goal of healthcare is to serve the community as best as they can.

Whistle blowing in Healthcare: the right thing to do

Some may say that whistle blowers in healthcare are nothing but trouble makers, but I feel that they are courageous individuals. These are people who risk a lot to honor their Code of Ethics and alert someone to wrongdoing and neglect within a health care organization. Those who sit back and allow wrong doings to occur are the ones who should be frowned upon. Our society has become accustom to this unwritten law of not snitching on one another which is perceived as being a traitor. While I feel that the notion of whistle blowing is a courageous morale act, there are a lot of negative consequences that come from this act such as disillusionment, isolation, humiliation, formation of an "anti-you" group, loss of job, questioning of the whistleblower's mental health, vindictive tactics to make the individual's work more difficult and/or insignificant, assassination of character, and formal reprimand from superiors. Whistleblowers have been the driving force behind a series of recent major contemporary public inquiries that have clearly identified significant deficiencies in institutional healthcare quality and safety. In conclusion whistle blowing by health care professionals should not be considered morally wrong. If hospital authorities fail to take action over legitimate reported concerns, whistle blowing is likely to be the only means available to the individual to protect patients at risk of harm.

Healthcare's ethical obligation to patients treatment

It may seem that the hospital has a clear-cut ethical responsibility to offer free or reduced-cost care for all of those in need of medical attention, but in reality they don’t. Millions of uninsured Americans come into hospital wanting and expecting treatment for their illness, then at the sight of their medical bill become infuriated when the cost seems high. Contrary to peoples beliefs hospitals are a major business, and like any other business they strive from profit. If a hospital loses enough money through providing care for those who cannot afford it, it will eventually be forced to close. Ethically a hospital can not deny any person from medical treatment in the U.S insured or not, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be billed for it. Medical equipment, personnel, etc provided to a hospital needs to be funded. Allowing a hospital to operate in a way that allows treatment to go unpaid for jeopardizes the hospitals continuing existence and threatens to put hundreds out of employment. As a future hospital administrator I’m forced to look at this issue with a business point a view. I feel that it is impractical and even shortsighted to think that the hospital is acting unethically when they are only asking for the funds needed to treat the person.

Withholding treatment at the end of life.

When a patient isn’t capable of eating because he or she is ill, a healthcare provider is forced to make the decision of providing nutrition and hydration through intravenous hydration and a feeding tube. Healthcare providers usually don’t have a problem with starting this process, but withholding it at the end of life often becomes an issue that both physicians and family members face. Some people consider medically provided nutrition and hydration a basic human need, and subjecting the patient to a painful death through starvation and dehydration is immoral and barbaric. I feel that patients who aren’t going to recover from their illness should be taken off of feeding tubes by withholding the basic nutrients and hydration needed to live. Research studies have proven that forgoing nutrition and hydration near the end of life leads to greater patient comfort. In fact the study showed that these patients generally did not experience thirst or hunger through this process. People are getting feeding tubes confused with actual drink and food, which is not the case. Feeding tubes are small plastic tube passed through the nose or mouth into the stomach which provides the hydration and nutrients the patient needs to live. Now to me that sounds more barbaric.

Bribery in Healthcare

Bribery has become one of the major issues of medical ethics that doesn't necessarily concern directly dealing with the patient. Doctors are often offered bribes by pharmaceutical companies, in an attempt to have those doctors prescribe the pharmaceutical companies' drugs more often. I feel that by doing this would put the doctor in conflict with important principles of medical ethics, such as the importance of putting the patients' interests first. The patient being prescribe unnecessary medication can become detrimental to their well being. The patient could become addicted with the quantity increase of medication. Also the numerous about of unnecessary pills could cause liver problems and other health related risk that stems from a lot of pill consumption. This type of bribe conflicts with the integrity of the medical profession. I believed that doctors are taught to work their hardest and do what they believe in their hearts to be the best decisions. Prescribing medications for money takes away that highly valued principle, and the trust of the patient.

Should medical errors be withheld from the patient?

Medical errors will forever continue as long as healthcare providers are still human. Once a medical error has they occured, what should be the attitude of the medical profession? Should it be to withhold such information from patients? since ‘what they don't know can't hurt them’ or should such information be honestly disclosed to patients and the appropriate measures taken to redress and prevent any such errors in future? I feel as though it depends on the seriousness of the medical error. If the medical error has caused the patient any harm or a financial deficit due to a longer hospital stay, then i say tell them. I as the patient should know the reasoning behind any misfortune that may have occured while being treated.It isn't fair to keep me in the dark about anything that is negatively affecting me.On the other hand if a medical error has occured and nothing has been negatively affected by it then i say "don't tell me".Only thing that will occur by informing me of the error is angry and worry that could result in a number of consequences for the hospital.

Elderly health care causing unhealthy dilemmas

Recent breakthroughs in technology throughout the U.S health care industry have pioneered some of the boldest and most promising cancer treatments, surgical procedures, and genetically engineered drugs that have increased Americans life expectancy. Unfortunately the same technologies that are helping Americans live longer are also increasing demands on the health care system from a growing population of senior citizens. Questions are now being raised about when and from whom treatments should be withheld? Competition for the scarce medical resources of the health care system grows beyond the system's capacity to provide care for everyone. I believe the best solution to this ethical issue would be rationing out the health care delivered to the elderly. the health of the young can be ensured by relatively cheap preventive measures such as exercise programs and health education, the medical conditions of the elderly are often complicated, requiring the use of expensive technologies and treatments often, these treatments are ineffective in providing any tangible benefit for either patient or society. I’m sorry if this sounds harsh, but prolonging the lives of the elderly who no longer serve any use for society seems to be very wasteful. As a health care administer I can’t allow myself to become influenced by doing what sounds right all the time, unfortunately the health care industry has become a business and like every other business sometimes you have to do what’s better for the business. In this case I feel like rationing treatment for the elderly is for the betterment of the U.S. Basically the costs to prolong the life of one elderly person might be more productively directed toward the treatment of a far greater number of younger persons whose health can be ensured by less costly measures.