ANSWER:

Introduction

The principle of patient autonomy raises ethical dilemmas in medical practice. Whereas the adoption of mutual-decision making may be preferable in optimizing clinical outcomes, the autonomy principle lays that patient decision is inadmissible. According to Jacobs (2019), autonomy provides the patients with contemporary liberality to self-determination regarding their own treatment decisions and consents. Patients make decisions within the confines of their worldviews and beliefs. This paper focuses on the spiritual needs of Mike and how they might affect the ultimate clinical outcome.

Principle of Autonomy in Mike’s Case

The physician should create a balance between the principles of autonomy and nonmaleficence to optimize clinical outcomes. Even though the principle of autonomy entitles patients to the ability to make rational judgments concerning their treatment administration, Mike cripples his son's health by choosing to forgo dialysis for faith-based healing. Adults are responsible for making their medical decisions over their bodies. For exceptional events like this case study, parents are obligated to decide on their children's overall health status, and general autonomy is given to them legitimately (Van der Hout et al., 2019). The physician recognizes that this decision is harmful but respects it anyway. James' health condition deteriorates, and his parents decide to seek medical attention they had abandoned. The physician explains the severity of James' condition advises his parents on possible medical interventions to avoid irrational decisions that may course further harm. 

The principle of nonmaleficence obliges physicians to provide healthcare without causing any form of harm to the patients. Upon the doctor realizing that Mike's decisions may course more damage to his son, he should act on the nonmaleficence principle to prevent James' parents from making irrational decisions and understand most practicable interventions without undermining their system of belief.

Christian Perspective on Sickness and Health

            Christians believe that suffering originated from the disobedience of God by Adam and Eve. Moreover, Christians also acknowledge that suffering is universal according to Romans 8:22. As a result, the primacy of their medical opinions is based on their Christian worldview, which causes ethical dilemmas in actualizing proper medical intervention when exercising autonomy. Predominantly, the perception of physicians and Christians differ on matters of health. Mike and Joanne are strong believers of Christianity and embrace God's ultimacy regarding their purpose of life and his ability to procure healing based on their faith. They perceive their son's health condition as a test of faith in God, and however unpromising the situations may, they should never express doubt in the healing power of God. Extensively, the Christian worldview focuses on healing as a reward of steadfast faith in God. Therefore, Mike and Joanne gave up dialysis to seek faith-based intervention, which the physician respected despite knowing it was not the optimal solution. James' condition worsens, and Mike questions himself whether this is due to a lack of faith or a punishment from God. While it is essential to integrate Christianity into healthcare, it is imperative to understand God manifests his healing power through medical professionals. This necessitates the need for Christians to understand and believe in the healthcare substructures to cater for ultimate health restoration.

Christian Perspective on Medical Intervention

            Integration of Christianity into healthcare remains a matter of question. Enthusiasts of Christianity and spiritualism lean on the extreme perspectives that may compromise overall healthcare provision. Radical Christians believe that prayer is the primary and most appropriate method of medical intervention. Conversely, postmodern Christianity affirms the homogenization of faith-based perspective and scientism to procure reasonable care. Even though Mike expresses utmost faith in God to restore James’ health condition, he should have faith in the healthcare system to provide proper and effective treatment to his son.

Nevertheless, he should acknowledge that God works through care providers to save the life of others. By suggesting dialysis as the most appropriate treatment option, the physician acts in the best interest of James to get him out of danger. Overall, Christians should believe in God's ability to provide clinicians with wisdom to administer appropriate treatment interventions and redirect their prayers to the care providers. Christianity teaches about faith with action, and in this case, it involves not abandoning medical interventions but praying about them to improve clinical outcomes.

Spiritual Needs Assessment

            Spiritual-based care is an integral part of the care provided to patients. According to World Health Organization (WHO), quality care dispensation involves the ability of physicians to prevent suffering and tackle associated problems beyond physical symptoms. This explicitly involves assessing a patient's spiritual, cultural, or emotional needs through person-centered approaches to realize specific needs and individualized preferences. According to Lazenby (2018), spiritual needs assessment by healthcare providers fosters a healthy patient-doctor relationship, and fulfillment of these needs may offer relief to anxiety, spiritual distress, and the patient's general health status. It is imperative to conduct spiritual assessments since they may influence medical perceptions, decisional interventions, and treatment adjustments. In this case, Mike has expressed strong faith in God yet an extremist perspective to forbid dialysis for a faith-centered healing process. The physician needs to conduct a spiritual need assessment to understand Mike's spiritual needs and why he chose faith-based intervention over dialysis. This might help reveal if Mike was undergoing spiritual distress or even going through an emotional instability that clouds his ability to make a sound judgment. While spiritual needs may not directly affect clinical outcomes, understanding its basic principles may provide a conducive atmosphere for medical interventions.

Conclusion

            The practicability of Christianity in medical practice remains unclear, with contradicting beliefs and values held by both physicians and patients. However, assessing patients' needs provides a clear understanding of other fundamental aspects that contribute to the general health status. Minimizing conflict between different perceptions and worldviews by adopting a patient-centered approach through needs assessment is critical to optimize clinical outcomes.

References

Jacobs, G. (2019). Patient autonomy in home care: Nurses’ relational practices of responsibility. Nursing ethics, 26(6), 1638-1653. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733018772070 

Lazenby, M. (2018, August). Understanding and addressing the religious and spiritual needs of advanced cancer patients. In Seminars in oncology nursing (Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 274-283). WB Saunders.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soncn.2018.06.008

van der Hout, S., Dondorp, W., & De Wert, G. (2019). The aims of expanded universal carrier screening: autonomy, prevention, and responsible parenthood. Bioethics, 33(5), 568-576. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12555