WP3 Blog 2

 I think I'm going to change my topic. I was initially looking at the cost of medical care and what doctors should do if patients are unable to pay for treatment. I'm changing to how healthcare handles situations with advanced directives and end-of-life wishes and requests. With these, how should doctors and those in the medical field address these things: should they interpret them liberally or should they interpret it strictly? Should the requests of their relatives be relied on if they don't have the directives with them? I learned just how traumatizing it can be for people who know the patient knowing that the medics and doctors aren't abiding by the patient's request. However, the doctors and medics have their responsibilities lined very clearly. I think I'm going to argue that the autonomy and rights of the patient take precedence over the doctor's opinion and choices in these end-of-life scenarios. This conflicts with the doctor and the pillar of beneficence. The doctors should look to help their patients: in this scenario, they're just standing idly by knowing that their patient is dying. Looking at it from this perspective, it makes sense why doctors don't always follow the orders of advanced directives or the requests from the relatives of the patient. 

https://www.ems1.com/paramedic-chief/articles/dnr-tattoos-are-they-legal-and-is-ems-bound-to-comply-RE78PPdJlpo3zjUs/ 

A man's tattoo that says "Do NOT Resuscitate"

While they can be helpful, tattoos are not legally accepted. One man had DNR tattooed after losing a bet, while indicating on file that he wanted resuscitation efforts