According to Koopmans (2016), miracles of healing existed since the early church. From the bible, Jesus performed many miracles to those who were suffering. He healed the sick, restored sight to the blind, the lame he made them walk and even cured the lepers. Christians also believed that suffering is how their faith is being tested and that it brings transformation to their lives (Zaki.et.al 2016). Jesus died on the cross so as to safe man from sin. He suffered a lot before he died. Even though Jesus went through all the suffering, he still had compassion to those who were suffering regardless of being a Christian or not. Jesus performed all the miracles of healing so as to alleviate suffering and pain of those involved. This shows that Christians should use any means available to alleviate suffering and pain so that the sick do not suffer. The bible also emphasizes on the issue of love. According to Kok (2015), Christians should love their neighbors as they love themselves. Therefore, they should be of help to anyone who needs their help.
The most pressing issue from this case study is the issue of decision making basing on religion (Graham-brown.et.al 2017). Mike and Joanne are rooted in their religion that they disregard other interventions that could be helpful to their son. They fail to recognize that even the disciples did not just preach the gospel but they also healed the sick. Mike could have employed the medical intervention for his son condition especially after an explanation by the medical physician. This poor decision has been shown to bring much suffering to their son James instead of making him better. This is not allowed in Christianity as even Jesus never allowed anyone to suffer for His sake instead, he made mane sacrifices so that others can benefit. Mike should have therefore placed his son’s illness and suffering first before deciding anything. Mike has not used his freedom of autonomy in a good way. According to scriptures, Christians are not owners of themselves but they are owned by God. They are therefore not allowed to make any decision they feel like especially if they are disadvantaging others. They should not abuse their freedom from the demands of the law for salvation but are to use that freedom to pursue love not their own selfish desires (Hockenberry and Wilson 2018).
Basing on the outcomes, Mike and Joanne should not be allowed to continue making decisions for James. James is an eight year old boy and he is still young to make his own decisions concerning his health. Even if Mike and Joanne are his close decision makers, the physician should not allow for harmful decisions to be made (Coyne, Hallstorm and soderback 2016). Parents should not deny treatment for their children especially if religion is involved. If a parent denies his or her child treatment, it is considered as child neglect especially if there is treatment available for that condition. If mike and Joanne could have accepted to start James on dialysis immediately, further kidney deterioration could not have occurred. Dialysis is helpful in eliminating excess water and waste products such as urea when the kidney is not functioning well. Accumulation of toxic products especially urea in the kidney for some days damages the nephrons of the kidney and therefore further deterioration. When certain percentages of the nephrons are damaged the kidney fails and waste products accumulate systemically and can cause death due to uremia. Kidney transplant will help replace the function of the failed kidney and has to be done promptly. If Mike is allowed to continue making decisions for James, then fatal outcomes may occur especially with continued delay (Voscamp.et.al 2018).
According to ethics in medicine, a parent is allowed to make decisions for their children if they are young or unable to make their own decisions (Rothman 2017). Ethics also allows medical practitioners to challenge parent’s decisions especially if the decisions place the child at significant risk of serious harm. The caretaker and the parent should reach a satisfactory resolution and if they don’t, child protection agency or a court order may be required. Mike refusing treatment for His son is unethical. The refusal should be considered as neglect or imprudent and appropriate action taken accordingly. Patient autonomy is an act of allowing patient to make their own decisions concerning their health without a healthcare provider trying to influence them (Murgic.et.al 2015). Health care provider should just educate them and inform them about their condition but should not decide for them. In an event of a minor, a parent is allowed to make decisions for his or her child. In the contrary, medical practitioners have been allowed to overrule and interfere with patients preferences with the aim of securing patient benefit or preventing harm. Therefore, patient autonomy is not satisfactory if it does not promote beneficence. In the case study, the decisions made by Mike and Joanne are not of any benefit to James instead, they are causing more harm to the patient. Mike is therefore not practicing patient autonomy even after being told about the dialysis which could have been helpful to James. Mike has also been informed about organ transplant but he is still rigid on giving in to the benefits to his son. His faith on supernatural healing has clouded him enough to deny his son’s medical rights basing on biomedical ethics.
According to Fox (2017), organ donation is a process of removing an organ surgically from one person and placing it into another person. This is necessary especially when the organ of the recipient has failed to function. Kidney transplant is the most common form of organ transplant. For organ transplant to occur the tissue match of the donor and recipient should match so that rejection cannot occur. Most of the time, organs match runs among family members and relatives. Sometimes, donors may not be related in blood. From the case study, Mike should not be the one deciding whether Samuel should donate his kidney to his brother or not. Healthcare practitioners should weigh the benefits and disadvantages of organ transplant to both James and Samuel and the best solution to be brought out. If the parents do not agree and the solution is of benefits to both children then the court should be involved. This is mainly if the parents denied basing on their religion. From this case, mike and Joanne have not followed ethical considerations on their decision making on James health. They have placed a lot of emphasis on their faith without considering the suffering their son is going through. They have also neglected their son’s right to medical attention (Hvidt.et.al 2016).
According to Linzey (2016), Christians should not see pain and hardship as a value to a potentially transformative effect on the religious adherent. Early church believed that suffering brings an individual closer to God who suffered with and for them on the cross. This should not be the case for the Christians of this generation. They should continue trusting in God but employ measures that are right in their health conditions. They should appreciate the benefits of medical science and incorporate them into their lives (Hedman.et.al 2015). They are called to embrace science and its biomedical applications to prevent and alleviate unnecessary suffering. They should do this while also respecting the sanctity of human life. Mike and Joanne should have accepted the medical intervention by starting their son on dialysis. This could have prevented further suffering and complications and organ transplant could have been avoided. They should have also involved God by praying that God would heal their son through the intervention used. They should have had faith in the medical practitioners treating their son and also involve their pastor in praying for him (Kabayashi.et.al 2015).
References
Coyne, I., Hallström, I., & Söderbäck, M. (2016). Reframing the focus from a family-centred to a child-centred care approach for children’s healthcare. Journal of Child Health Care, 20(4), 494-502.
Fox, R. C. (2017). Spare parts: Organ replacement in American society. Routledge.
Graham-Brown, M. P., Vasilica, C., Oates, T., Light, B., Clausner, C., Antonacoloulos, A., … & Barratt, J. (2017). Study protocol: responding to the needs of patients with IgA nephropathy, a social media approach. Clinical Kidney Journal.
Hedman, E., Lekander, M., Ljótsson, B., Lindefors, N., Rück, C., Andersson, G., & Andersson, E. (2015). Optimal cut-off points on the health anxiety inventory, illness attitude scales and whiteley index to identify severe health anxiety. PLoS One, 10(4), e0123412.
Hockenberry, M. J., & Wilson, D. (2018). Wong’s nursing care of infants and children. Elsevier Health Sciences.
Hvidt, N. C., Mayr, B., Paal, P., Frick, E., Forsberg, A., & Büssing, A. (2016). For and against organ donation and transplantation: intricate facilitators and barriers in organ donation perceived by German nurses and doctors. Journal of transplantation, 2016.
Kobayashi, L. C., Wardle, J., & von Wagner, C. (2015). Internet use, social engagement and health literacy decline during ageing in a longitudinal cohort of older English adults. J Epidemiol Community Health, 69(3), 278-283.
Kok, J. K. (2015). The radicality of early Christian oikodome: A theology that edifies insiders and outsiders. Verbum et Ecclesia, 36(3), 1-12.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download