Using the internet as your resource, find and read the case
Illinois v. Brown (
In Re
Fetus Brown
). When searching for the case, be sure to use reliable
internet resources. Most trusted sources end in .edu or .gov, but other websites
can be trusted if they seem relatively free of opinion or bias, are current, and
have a reputable author or sponsoring organization.
Then answer these 2 questions in 100 words
1. Using the Three-Step Ethical Model Is it legal? Is it balanced? How does it make me feel? evaluate the ethical dilemma
associated with the refusal of a blood transfusion.
2. Look at this case from one of the ethical standpoint consequential approach Summarize the
ethical standpoint and use it to show how you might have come to a similar or
different decision in this case.
Expert Solution Preview
Introduction:
Illinois v. Brown (In Re Fetus Brown) is a significant medical-legal case involving the ethical dilemma of a pregnant woman’s refusal to undergo a blood transfusion. As a medical professor, evaluating such cases is crucial for students to understand the legal and ethical implications of medical decisions. Therefore, answering the provided questions will assist in analyzing the case’s ethical dilemma and consequentialist approach of the decision.
1. Using the Three-Step Ethical Model, evaluate the ethical dilemma associated with the refusal of a blood transfusion.
The Three Step Ethical Model comprises three crucial elements that need to be evaluated before making any ethical decision. The first step is if the situation or decision taken is legal; the second step is evaluating if the choice made is balanced or evaluated impartially, and the last step is, how the decision feels. The ethical dilemma in Illinois v. Brown case arises when a pregnant woman refused to undergo a blood transfusion, putting her life and her unborn baby’s life in grave danger. Despite medical professionals’ efforts, the woman argued that her religious beliefs do not permit such treatment.
In the first step, the refusal of a blood transfusion would still be considered legal as it would be considered the patient’s right to refuse any medical treatment explicitly as this decision was religiously motivated. However, in the second step, the decision made by the woman may not have been balanced or evaluated impartially. The woman made a decision based on religious constraints that may not have been in the best interest of herself and her baby. Finally, considering the third step, the decision made by the patient would have put immense emotional pressure on both herself and the medical professionals involved.
2. Look at this case from one of the ethical standpoint consequential approach Summarize the ethical standpoint and use it to show how you might have come to a similar or different decision in this case.
The consequentialist approach evaluates the ethical problem based on the outcome of the decision. Under consequentialism, the decision made should result in the best outcome for the greatest number of people involved indirectly or directly. In this case, a consequentialist might argue that the decision made by the pregnant woman only considered her religious beliefs without considering the physical and emotional outcomes for both herself and her unborn child. The decision made by the woman, i.e., the refusal of the blood transfusion, resulted in a severe impact on both the mother and her child’s health. A consequentialist might have made a different decision considering the potential outcomes of the decision made.
In conclusion, it is pivotal in medical education that we learn and analyze such cases to develop a better understanding of medical ethics and its legal implications for informed decision making.