Ethics Paper.
I am doing a paper now on whether healthcare workers should be able to learn new medical procedures on just confirmed dead patients before rigor mortis sets in. I am curious as to how many people would allow their family members to be used in such a way. And if not, then why? At present, there are mannequins used to simulate the human body and are used for CPR, ACLS, IV insertions, etc., but how a mannequin can be used is pretty limited as there is no blood flow and it is just not the same as real human tissue and anatomy. Cadavers are helpful, but also are not the same since they are embalmed and "prepared".
The ethical scenario that was presented in class was an ER staff learning how to intubate a patient that was not able to be intubated during a code blue and ended up dying. Several doctors, paramedics and nurses proceeded to try to "practice" intubating the patient after the patient had been pronounced dead and the code blue had ended. The patient was unidentified and had no family present. In the process of "practice" intubation, the patients front teeth were broken off which can happen and should be able to be fixed at the funeral home. After 5 hours, the family was found and the patient identified. The family did not agree to organ donation. Do you think that the ER staff was wrong to "practice" intubation on this patient knowing these facts? Would you have been upset if you were one of the family members?
Do you think that healthcare workers should be able to practice on the newly dead? If so, do you think that family consent should be obtained first?
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
23 Jun 2016, 2:41 pm
