Using Ethical Principles to Resolve Ethical Dilemma

1 Using Ethical Principles to Resolve Ethical Dilemma Controversy surrounding the vaccination of children has persisted for years. Many parents cite vaccine safety as their principal concern for vaccine hesitancy. Researchers argue that vaccines are safe and have continuously impacted public health since their introduction in 1798. In addition to suppressing significant diseases like smallpox, measles, and tuberculosis, vaccines continue to reshape human health and medicine. Also, scientists consider vaccines the most remarkable medical invention due to their impact on public health. Evidence proves that immunization is beneficial to human health. Unfortunately, parents are increasingly refusing vaccinations.

Buy this excellently written paper or order a fresh one from acemyhomework.com

2 Adewale et al. (2019) noted that effectiveness and safety are key factors causing parents to refuse or postpone vaccinations. The decision by parents not to vaccinate their children, irrespective of the reasoning, exposes the community to the risk of devastating diseases (Wilkinson & McBride, 2022). Healthcare professionals face a daunting challenge when a parent refuses vaccination. These professionals resolve these challenges using ethical principles. This paper explores an ethical dilemma arising from a young parent's refusal to vaccinate their daughter.

Case Study Overview Jenna and Chris are young parents of a 5-day-old baby girl, anticipating raising their child the traditional way. However, the parents have rejected vaccination, arguing that it would increase their daughter's risk of autism. Dr. Kerr advises the parents that vaccines are safe and protect children from contagious diseases. The doctor also pointed out that vaccines reduce infection and mortality among children besides protecting the community from infectious diseases. Dr. Kerr uses valid data from Federal Government resources to highlight the health benefits of vaccination. Dr. clarified that the federal government is actively involved in vaccine monitoring programs to maintain vaccine effectiveness and public safety.

Unfortunately, Dr. Kerr’s persuasion was insufficient to convince the Smiths that vaccination would improve their daughter’s safety.

Ethical Issues in the Case Anna's parents' vaccine refusal was the central ethical dilemma in this case. The parents believe that vaccines would weaken their daughter's immunity, leading to conditions like autism spectrum disorder. Dr. Kerr respects the parent’s beliefs but expounds on the health benefits of vaccination and the risks of vaccine refusal. Dr. Kerry clarified that the child’s health was at stake and that healthcare professionals must act in the child’s best interest in similar situations. The doctor informed the Smiths that failure to vaccinate would

3 have remarkable consequences for the child, the family, and the community, but they still refused to consent.

Analyzing the Case with the Ethical Decision-Making Model Determining a suitable approach to address issues in ethical dilemmas is a significant challenge for many healthcare providers. However, health professionals can use ethical behavior, moral judgment, and moral awareness to analyze these issues. Applying the ethical decision-making model in such situations supports the doctor's best interests and ensures the doctor upholds the ethical principles (Wilkinson & McBride, 2022). The doctor recognized the challenges surrounding the failure to vaccinate the child, thus reflecting her moral awareness. She recognized that Smith refused to vaccinate due to limited knowledge and misinformation, as highlighted by Reich (2018).

The doctor used moral judgment to convince the Smiths that vaccines are safe, although they might generate side effects in some people. The doctor’s ethical behavior was reflected in how she handled the situation. She did not coerce or threaten the parents but advised them on the benefits of vaccines.

Communication Approaches Effectiveness Effective communication is a vital tool in solving ethical dilemmas. It enables the care providers to pass crucial information to their clients. Rus and Groselj (2021) pointed out that to resolve issues surrounding the parental refusal of vaccines, the care provider should identify interventions that build trust, increase parental satisfaction, and enhance compliance.

Interventions such as active listening help the doctors understand the parent's perceptions and the reasons behind their refusal to vaccinate. Using effective communication could jeopardize patient-provider interactions. Ineffective interventions destroy trust and hamper the clinician’s role in educating their clients (Wilkinson & McBride, 2022).

4 Dr. Kerry used active listening, allowing the parents to highlight their concerns about the vaccine. The doctor was aware of her role in advocating the child’s rights. She analyzed Smith's apprehensions and explained the health benefits of vaccinating children. Also, the doctor quoted reliable sources, including the federal government, to convince the Smiths.

Using Ethical Principles to Resolve the Dilemma The ethical principles, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, are crucial in resolving ethical dilemmas. Autonomy recognizes the patient’s right to make medical decisions (Adewale et al., 2019). However, when dealing with a child, the parent assumes the right to make such decisions. Beneficence involves providing helpful medical services to clients. No-maleficence entails providing services that do not harm the client (Giubilini, 2018). Applying these principles to examine a dilemma helps the clinician to identify and understand the conflicting issues.

The solution to the vaccine refusal dilemma is to apply autonomy and beneficence.

The doctor should respect the Smith’s right to make medical decisions on their child’s behalf.

However, in line with beneficence, the doctor should educate the Smiths about the significance of vaccines in safeguarding the child’s health. Further, the doctor should urge the Smiths to reconsider their stance for the child’s best interest. This approach could foster professional collaboration and improve relationships across disciplines since it promotes respect and values patients' rights.

Conclusion Parental refusal of vaccines hampers the healthcare providers’ responsibility to offer preventive services to patients. The conflict between the clinician’s duty to protect and the parent’s autonomy could jeopardize a child’s health if not resolved ethically and practically.

Effective communication helps care providers to educate parents about vaccine safety and benefits.

5

6 References Adewale, O., Cooper, C., Felix, P., Mitchell, A. K., Savage, J., & Mase, W. A. (2019). The ethics of parental refusal to vaccinate: Costs, community safety, and individual rights.

Journal of the Georgia Public Health Association, 7(2), 98–103. https://doi.org/10.20429/jgpha.2019.070215 Giubilini, A. (2018). The ethics of vaccination. Springer International Publishing.

Reich, J. A. (2018). Calling the shots: Why parents reject vaccines. NYU Press.

Rus, M., & Groselj, U. (2021). Ethics of vaccination in childhood— A framework based on the four principles of biomedical ethics. Vaccines, 9(2), 113. https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fvaccines9020113 Wilkinson, D., & McBride, A. K. (2022). Clinical ethics: consent for vaccination in children.

Archives of Disease in Childhood, 107(1), 3–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2021-322981