There are timeswhen we let nature take its course without our interference. Thereare some things, however, that are not natural when performed byhumans. As human beings, we have no authority to change the flow ofanother person’s life. Ashley is leading a life that is not hersafter a lot of modification to her body. The doctors somehow tried tointervene and interrupt the progress of the cancerous tumors. Wasthis the right decision for this case? It is argued that themedicines have managed to keep the young girl alive. Why then shouldthe drugs not be used to make her comfortable and lead a normal life?
It is a concernraised by her father and it stands out to be my greatest argument. Itis sometimes difficult to draw ethical boundaries, but I guess inthis situation, Ashley should have been left to grow normally. Fromthe explanation, she will lead a life of a three month child as thisis the only thing she remembers when she was normal[ CITATION Dun16 l 1033 ].The parents wanted to have their daughter live a normal life and thisis what prompted them to make such a decision. Any parent would wantthe best for their children making them to take care of them. Thiskind of disease can be devastating to the child and frustrating tothe parent.
According to thearticle by Lewis, Ashley’s treatment should have been permitted bythe hospital. The moral line of ethics has truly shifted and thefocus is the benefit of the intervention[ CITATION Lew07 l 1033 ].When the benefits outweigh the risks, the intervention is allowed toproceed. When a condition becomes a concern to the individual, theyare allowed to make decisions regarding the interventions that theyrequire. The work of the health care provider is to provide theoptions to the patient and let them make decisions. They can as wellmake suggestions to them and outline the benefits and risksassociated with each of the available options.
The article byLindemann addresses the concept of romance within the family. Theparents would want to do anything possible as a means of making thechildren comfortable. The concern of the father is justified. Heinitially thought that medical intervention was enough to make herdaughter lead a normal life[ CITATION Lin081 l 1033 ]. This is notthe case, however. What is required of them is care to the sufferinggirl. There is nothing much that they can do regarding the girl’scondition. From this article, the weakest argument is the role of theparents in the life of Ashley. As a young individual, the parents donot necessarily need to make decisions for her.
One of myclassmates argues that the intention of the parents was to have theirchild lead a normal life. It is justified in both of the articles.The parents had gone out of their and performed intensive researchregarding the types of interventions that would be effective to theirdaughter. By doing this, we can clearly point out their concern asthe primary caretakers of the girl. The mother went out her way toresearch on the prognosis of the condition only to find out that thedisease is not curable[ CITATION Dun16 l 1033 ]. The manyspecialties consulted by the mother came out with the conclusion thatAshley’s condition would never improve. The decision made by thehospital is not justified. Knowing very well that the disease is notcurable, they should have left the girl alone.
Dunn, M. (2016). On the relationship between medical ethics and medical professionalism . Journal of Medical Ethics, 627-631.
Lewis, J. (2007, January 6). The moral line in medicine shifts once again. The Independent, p. 37.
Lindemann, H., & Nelson, J. (2008). The Romance of the Family. The Hastings Center Report, 19-21.