Integrate one nursing ethical principle the advanced practice nurse could use in the decision-making process for a potentially lifesaving procedures of who should be saved first, who lives, and who dies regarding allocation of scarce resources during a pandemic
Integrating Ethical Principles Advanced Practice Nurses Could Use in Potentially Life Saving Situations
The first code of ethics for the nursing profession was drafted by the International Council of Nurses and was accepted by the Council of National Representatives (CNR) on July 10, 1953. CNR is the organization’s deliberative entity, and it holds meetings twice a year in various locations across the world to discuss ethical principles, carry out any necessary changes, and engage in in-depth reflections relevant to ethical standards in nursing. As was previously said, twice yearly get-togethers provide this body of debate with the opportunity to detect emerging problems in the ethics of nursing. In spite of this, the ethical obligations that come with nursing practice have remained remarkably stable throughout the course of the years. The accompanying research paper includes a list containing the substance of the first International Code of Ethics for Nurses, with the three primary tasks topping the list. These responsibilities are as follows: “to preserve life, to alleviate suffering, and to promote health.” When dealing with emergencies involving the preservation of life, registered nurses are primarily motivated by ethical standards. Given the widespread scarcity of resources, the devastating impacts of the epidemic undoubtedly forced nurses to make very tough choices about who should be saved first, as well as who should survive or die. It is for this reason that a variety of circumstances that would not prevent nurses from adhering to ethical ideals are going to be investigated. One of the most important factors is the availability of and management of human resources. This is due to the fact that, provided adequate access to these means, it is possible to mitigate the issue that pertains to a crisis in the health care system, in which nurses are compelled to withdraw care from patients who are, for the most part, gravely ill and have a poor prognosis. “Failure to provide appropriate resources may endanger the right to healthcare, particularly the right of critically sick patients in a situation like that produced by COVID-19” (Falcó et al., 2021, p.183). This is according to the research done by Falcó and colleagues in the year 2021.
When there are only so many resources available, who gets to live?
The ethical principles of beneficence and respect for autonomy are strongly associated to a vital factor in making difficult life-or-death decisions during a pandemic with limited resources. These decisions must be made while resources are scarce. Patients who needed to be admitted to the intensive care unit, for example, had to undergo a comprehensive review by the interdisciplinary team, which included the advanced nurse, before a decision could be made regarding whether the patient should be transferred or allowed to go. Given the lack of knowledge of the sickness, the lack of information (oftentimes) of the patient’s preferences, and the level of ambiguity related with the consequences produced by the virus, this presented a significant problem for medical experts. According to Falcó et al.’s research from 2021, the rules that should be followed while dealing with unclear scenarios include factors such as the patient’s age, previous medical history, and level of fragility. Because of this, patients who were younger, did not have any comorbidities, and had a better prognosis were more likely to survive as a result of the availability of ventilators and the usage of particular drugs for these patients. In order to properly categorize these patients based on their severity, the nurses were required to adhere to the rules that were issued by governmental organizations and scientific associations. According to research, when deciding how to divide limited resources between multiple critically sick patients, triage procedures should give priority to the patient who has the greatest chance of surviving their condition. Even though it can be highly upsetting for the families of individuals who have little chance of survival, the ethical principle of life preservation is clearly proven here, eventually aiming for the better good. This is the case despite the fact that ultimately the goal is to serve the greater good.
References
Buckwalter, W., & Peterson, A. Opinions of the general public regarding the distribution of limited resources during the COVID-19 epidemic. Plos One, 15(11), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240651 (This link will take you to another website.)
Falcó, P. A., Zuriguel, P. E., Via, C. G., Bosch, A. A., & Bonetti, L. Ethical tensions arose during the COVID19 pandemic, as illustrated by the cases of intensive care facilities in Spain and Italy. 181–188 in International Nursing Review, volume 68, issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12645 (This link will take you to another website.)
Oguisso, T., Hiromi-Takashi, M., Fernandes de Freitas, G., Barrionuevo-Bonini, B., & Araújo da Silva, T. The first code of ethics to be developed on an international level for nurses. Texto & Contexto Enfermagem, 28, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-265X-TCE-2018-0140
student 2 Catalina
