In addition to the topic study materials, use the chart you completed and questions you answered in the Topic 3 about "Case Study: Healing and Autonomy" as the basis for your responses in this assignm

Medical Indications Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

Patient Preferences Autonomy

Beneficence implies a behavior attributed to the best intent in a person’s mind, as non-beneficence stresses on trying not acting to cause suffering or injury (Beever, 2016). Mike and Joanne served on the best intents regardless of the medical implications that James’s health status would worsen if it remained untreated. They proved their intentions of not injuring their son by bringing back James to receive treatment despite their initial stand.

The expression of the patient’s choice is called patient preferences. Autonomy focuses on a person’s right to making a decision. James is an underage, eight years old, and he cannot exercise autonomy rights (Gillon, 2018). However, his parents need to consult him before making their decision. This consultation will determine whether James is okay with their decision. The physician has the power to influence this decision, but should talk to James’ parents.

Quality of Life Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy

Contextual Features Justice and Fairness

Health status of Mike’s son before receiving medical treatment was worse. After consistent dialysis, the health status (condition) improved. Nevertheless, he requires a placement of a healthy kidney from another person to get a long-term solution for his condition. Mike had two options, either James' brother to donate the kidney, or depend on their Christianity faith (Gillon, 2018). Depending on the last experience, the Mike and Joanne needed to first consult their son and understand his position regarding the health problem. They need to behave and take into consideration his exemplary interests in thought and permit him to receive a kidney placement from his brother because last time prayers did not work.

Contextual features establish social, legal, and familial backgrounds that shape medical decision making (Gillon, 2018). The religious faith of the parents of James that it was possible to recover by God’s miracles shaped their medical decisions. Their consideration relied on their Christianity faith rather than permitting James to get a kidney placement from Samuel. Justice and fairness emphasize on equality with the limited resources (Carr & Winslow, 2017). The conflict of interest emerged when the compatible tissue was traced to be that of Samuel. Both Joanne and Mike were ready to permit other individuals to sacrifice one of their kidneys for James, but could not allow their son’s brother to give.

According to the believers’ point of view, beneficence is the most critical principle (Beever, & Brightman, 2016). The reason is that the parents act and behave while bearing the best of intents in their thoughts regarding their children. Christians portray their religious faith that their children recover or get healed by means of consistent prayers. They decide to pray intensively instead of seeking medical treatment from care facilities. Their strong faith becomes one of their driving forces to opt for prayers. It is unjustifiable to blame them for degenerating health of their kid, James, because they behaved in good faith and had no ill-intention that can cause harm to him. After realizing that the condition of James had deteriorated at a high rate, they opted for medical treatment in the hospital, a decision that was not encouraged during the initial stages of their son’s condition. By deciding for treatment, it meant that they did not want to be responsible for any harm or consequence of the untreated disease. With limited resources to treat James, his parents’ Christian friends and physician helped time at a time of desperation on where James can get a kidney, although no kidney could match. The reason was to have James get treatment in a just and fair manner.

A Christian can prioritize the four principles in the case’s situation that beneficence leads, followed by non-maleficence, then justice and fairness and autonomy. The reason is that Christians perceive parents to portray love to their kids by doing what is the best and in line with kids’ desires that are connected to autonomy’s principle (Carr, 2017). Parents need to make sure that regardless the circumstance, they are responsible for protecting and not causing injury to their kids. This concept connects with the principle of non-maleficence. Christian believers require a practice of justice and fairness in daily undertakings and events (Gillon, 2018). They should do so by evaluating the two opposing sides, such as relying on prayers or medical treatment, then deciding on the way that does not have a conflict of interest. Any available treatment alternative put forward by a medical practitioner or Christian themselves must depict the potentiality of serving justice to parties involved. What they see as good to do should always be allowed to be done by others (Beever & Brightman, 2016). Lastly, Christians should also offer their fellows an opportunity to show their thought concerning a particular decision or act which is attributed to the principle of autonomy.