Considering the condition of the eight-year-old patient with stage IV cancer, the prospects for a return to normal life with or without treatment were significantly low. It will therefore be difficult to try and cure stage IV cancer that had already spread to major organs using chemotherapy, with the management of symptoms being the major priority.
A third party can judge that the quality of life is undesirable for a patient who cannot express such a judgment in cases of patients who have lost consciousness for a long time (Forte et al., 2018). Patients who have stayed on life support for long periods of time require Third parties such as close family members to assess their quality of life and determine whether it’s desirable.
Different prejudices can affect providers’ evaluation of patients’ quality of life, such as considering a patient’s diagnosis.
The ethical issues that arise in relation to improving and enhancing the patient’s quality of life are related to beneficence and nonmaleficence.
Quality of life assessments determines different issues, such as assessing the treatment plan and administering life-changing treatment to patients.
The rationale and plan to forgo life-sustaining treatment would involve instances where patients would have a poor quality of life and would not have any chance of recovery.
Physician-assisted suicide is illegal in some states, where it is still illegal in others. On the other hand, the practice is mainly viewed as unethical because the main role of healthcare providers is preserving life and not assisting patients in taking their own life (Gornick & Zikmund-Fisher, 2019).
Contextual Features: The Principles of Justice and Fairness
There are different interprofessional professional and business interests that might create conflict in the clinical treatment of patients especially related to health insurance and reimbursement. In some instances, health insurance providers may fail to reimburse certain treatments for patients affecting the whole treatment process (van Bruchem-Visser et al., 2020).
Family members and insurance providers might have an interest in clinical decisions due to various reasons.
Generally, patient confidentiality is protected from any third parties; however, insurance providers may sometimes access patient information during reimbursement to assess the need for reimbursements of certain treatments.
Financial factors can create a conflict of interest in clinical decisions, especially in instances where a patient cannot be able to afford certain recommended treatments.
On the other hand, instances of allocation of scarce resources can affect clinical decisions, especially in healthcare facilities that do not have adequate resources and a high number of patients (van Bruchem-Visser et al., 2020).
Religious issues such as the prohibition of certain treatment approaches in a given religion can influence clinical decisions significantly.