UMUC HMGT372 Week 1 Discussion Latest 2019 JUNE Question # 00602013 Course Code : HMGT372 Subject: Health Care Due on: 06/06/2019 Posted On: 06/06/2019 01:08 PM Tutorials: 1 Rating: 4.7/5

HMGT372 Legal and Ethical Issues in Health Care

Week 1 Discussion

Theme 1:

It is a
challenging job to be a student. All students juggle multiple priorities and
responsibilities trying to gain the highest grades at the same time. Please
offer your strategies on time management and study skills to your peers.
Provide minimum three of the most helpful tools and/or strategies that you use
to a high degree of success. Tell us how you apply those tools or skills by
sharing an example. Discuss the tips
offered by your peers and reflect how or if they will work for you. Some of the
additional information could be found in Helpful Tips overview.

Theme 2:

Discuss
with your colleagues the following questions: What is “Legality”?
What are “Ethics”? Compare and contrast legality and ethics in health care. Provide one (1)
specific real life legal case example of a violation of legality in a
healthcare organization and one (1) specific real life legal case example of a
violation of ethics in a healthcare organization that you find on the internet
or in the print media. See Discussion Expectations and Grading for rules on
discussions. Read background articles. This discussion requires additional
research beyond reading the articles.

Assigned
reading materials:

Understanding
Federal Courts – (Control>>Click>>From Drop down Menu select Open
in New Window or Copy/Paste into your URL)
http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure

Introduction
to the U.S. Legal System-
http://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-system/introduction-to-the-u-s-legal-system.html

Legal
issues facing health care
professionals-http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/13-legal-issues-for-hospitals-and-health-systems.html

Ethical and
legal analysis of health care
case-http://ijahsp.nova.edu/articles/Vol2num1/pdf/lazaro.pdf

This
educational resource is designed to help health care organization directors ask
knowledgeable and appropriate questions related to health care corporate
compliance.http://www.hcca-info.org/Portals/0/PDFs/Resources/Conference_Handouts/Clinical_Practice_Compliance_Conference/2007/Fri/601Handout.pdf

Example of
an Employee Handbook from Johns Hopkins:
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/human_resources/_docs/employee_handbook_non-union_non-represented.pdf

Health Care
Ethics – samples.jbpub.com/9781449665357/Chapter2.pdf (copy/paste into your
URL)

A Framework
for Thinking Ethically

This
document is designed as an introduction to thinking ethically. We all have an
image of our better selves-of how we are when we act ethically or are “at
our best.” We probably also have an image of what an ethical community, an
ethical business, an ethical government, or an ethical society should be.
Ethics really has to do with all these levels-acting ethically as individuals,
creating ethical organizations and governments, and making our society as a
whole ethical in the way it treats everyone.

What is
Ethics?

Simply
stated, ethics refers to standards of behavior that tell us how human beings
ought to act in the many situations in which they find themselves-as friends,
parents, children, citizens, business people, teachers, professionals, and so
on.

It is
helpful to identify what ethics is NOT:

Ethics is
not the same as feelings. Feelings provide important information for our
ethical choices. Some people have highly developed habits that make them feel
bad when they do something wrong, but many people feel good even though they
are doing something wrong. And often our feelings will tell us it is
uncomfortable to do the right thing if it is hard.

Ethics is
not religion. Many people are not religious, but ethics applies to everyone.
Most religions do advocate high ethical standards but sometimes do not address
all the types of problems we face.

Ethics is
not following the law. A good system of law does incorporate many ethical
standards, but law can deviate from what is ethical. Law can become ethically
corrupt, as some totalitarian regimes have made it. Law can be a function of
power alone and designed to serve the interests of narrow groups. Law may have
a difficult time designing or enforcing standards in some important areas, and
may be slow to address new problems.

Ethics is
not following culturally accepted norms. Some cultures are quite ethical, but
others become corrupt -or blind to certain ethical concerns (as the United
States was to slavery before the Civil War). “When in Rome, do as the
Romans do” is not a satisfactory ethical standard.

Ethics is
not science. Social and natural science can provide important data to help us
make better ethical choices. But science alone does not tell us what we ought
to do. Science may provide an explanation for what humans are like. But ethics
provides reasons for how humans ought to act. And just because something is
scientifically or technologically possible, it may not be ethical to do it.

Why Identifying
Ethical Standards is Hard

There are
two fundamental problems in identifying the ethical standards we are to follow:

1. On what
do we base our ethical standards?

2. How do
those standards get applied to specific situations we face?

If our
ethics are not based on feelings, religion, law, accepted social practice, or
science, what are they based on? Many philosophers and ethicists have helped us
answer this critical question. They have suggested at least five different
sources of ethical standards we should use.

Five
Sources of Ethical Standards

The
Utilitarian Approach

Some
ethicists emphasize that the ethical action is the one that provides the most
good or does the least harm, or, to put it another way, produces the greatest
balance of good over harm. The ethical corporate action, then, is the one that
produces the greatest good and does the least harm for all who are
affected-customers, employees, shareholders, the community, and the
environment. Ethical warfare balances the good achieved in ending terrorism
with the harm done to all parties through death, injuries, and destruction. The
utilitarian approach deals with consequences; it tries both to increase the
good done and to reduce the harm done.

The Rights
Approach

Other
philosophers and ethicists suggest that the ethical action is the one that best
protects and respects the moral rights of those affected. This approach starts
from the belief that humans have a dignity based on their human nature per se
or on their ability to choose freely what they do with their lives. On the
basis of such dignity, they have a right to be treated as ends and not merely
as means to other ends. The list of moral rights -including the rights to make
one’s own choices about what kind of life to lead, to be told the truth, not to
be injured, to a degree of privacy, and so on-is widely debated; some now argue
that non-humans have rights, too. Also, it is often said that rights imply
duties-in particular, the duty to respect others’ rights.

The
Fairness or Justice Approach

Aristotle
and other Greek philosophers have contributed the idea that all equals should
be treated equally. Today we use this idea to say that ethical actions treat
all human beings equally-or if unequally, then fairly based on some standard
that is defensible. We pay people more based on their harder work or the
greater amount that they contribute to an organization, and say that is fair.
But there is a debate over CEO salaries that are hundreds of times larger than
the pay of others; many ask whether the huge disparity is based on a defensible
standard or whether it is the result of an imbalance of power and hence is
unfair.

The Common
Good Approach

The Greek
philosophers have also contributed the notion that life in community is a good
in itself and our actions should contribute to that life. This approach
suggests that the interlocking relationships of society are the basis of
ethical reasoning and that respect and compassion for all others-especially the
vulnerable-are requirements of such reasoning. This approach also calls
attention to the common conditions that are important to the welfare of
everyone. This may be a system of laws, effective police and fire departments,
health care, a public educational system, or even public recreational areas.

The Virtue
Approach

A very
ancient approach to ethics is that ethical actions ought to be consistent with
certain ideal virtues that provide for the full development of our humanity.
These virtues are dispositions and habits that enable us to act according to
the highest potential of our character and on behalf of values like truth and
beauty. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, tolerance, love, fidelity,
integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues.
Virtue ethics asks of any action, “What kind of person will I become if I
do this?” or “Is this action consistent with my acting at my
best?”

Putting the
Approaches Together

Each of the
approaches helps us determine what standards of behavior can be considered
ethical. There are still problems to be solved, however.

The first
problem is that we may not agree on the content of some of these specific
approaches. We may not all agree to the same set of human and civil rights.

We may not
agree on what constitutes the common good. We may not even agree on what is a
good and what is a harm.

The second
problem is that the different approaches may not all answer the question
“What is ethical?” in the same way. Nonetheless, each approach gives
us important information with which to determine what is ethical in a
particular circumstance. And much more often than not, the different approaches
do lead to similar answers.

Making
Decisions

Making good
ethical decisions requires a trained sensitivity to ethical issues and a
practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing
the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action. Having
a method for ethical decision making is absolutely essential. When practiced
regularly, the method becomes so familiar that we work through it automatically
without consulting the specific steps.

The more
novel and difficult the ethical choice we face, the more we need to rely on
discussion and dialogue with others about the dilemma. Only by careful
exploration of the problem, aided by the insights and different perspectives of
others, can we make good ethical choices in such situations.

We have
found the following framework for ethical decision making a useful method for
exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying ethical courses of action.

A Framework
for Ethical Decision Making

Recognize
an Ethical Issue

Could this
decision or situation be damaging to someone or to some group? Does this
decision involve a choice between a good and bad alternative, or perhaps
between two “goods” or between two “bads”?

Is this
issue about more than what is legal or what is most efficient? If so, how?

Get the
Facts

What are
the relevant facts of the case? What facts are not known? Can I learn more
about the situation? Do I know enough to make a decision?

What
individuals and groups have an important stake in the outcome? Are some
concerns more important? Why?

What are
the options for acting? Have all the relevant persons and groups been
consulted? Have I identified creative options?

Evaluate
Alternative Actions

Evaluate
the options by asking the following questions:

Which
option will produce the most good and do the least harm? (The Utilitarian
Approach)

Which
option best respects the rights of all who have a stake? (The Rights Approach)

Which
option treats people equally or proportionately? (The Justice Approach)

Which
option best serves the community

as a whole,
not just some members?

(The Common
Good Approach)

Which
option leads me to act as the sort of person I want to be? (The Virtue
Approach)

Make a
Decision and Test It

Considering
all these approaches, which option best addresses the situation?

If I told
someone I respect-or told a television audience-which option I have chosen,
what would they say?

Act and
Reflect on the Outcome

How can my
decision be implemented with the greatest care and attention to the concerns of
all stakeholders?

How did my
decision turn out and what have I learned from this specific situation?

This
framework for thinking ethically is the product of dialogue and debate at the
Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University. Primary
contributors include Manuel Velasquez, Dennis Moberg, Michael J. Meyer, Thomas
Shanks, Margaret R. McLean, David DeCosse, Claire André, and Kirk O. Hanson. It
was last revised in May 2009.