NHS FPX 4000 Assessment 3 Using Ethical Decision-Making Model to Analyze the Case Study

The ethical decision-making applicable in analyzing this case study has three components that include moral awareness, moral judgment and ethical behavior. Moral awareness is the situation where one recognizes and acknowledges the presence of an ethical dilemma in an encounter or situation. Individual’s sensitivity to professional and personal values and principles makes one be aware of ethical dilemmas (Zorzato et al., 2022). Dr. Kerr’s moral awareness can be seen from her immediate understanding of the parents’ misinformed perception towards vaccination. Moral judgment refers to a situation where one makes a decision to choose between right and wrong choices or actions. Factors such as organizational culture and cognitive biases influence moral judgment (Adewale et al., 2019; Zorzato et al., 2022). Dr. Kerr’s moral judgment can be seen from her decision to educate the parents about the benefits of vaccination to their daughter. Ethical behavior entails the best decision that one adopts to address an ethical dilemma. Dr. Kerr’s ethical behavior can be seen in her decision to educate the parents about the benefits of vaccination using scientific evidence.

Effectiveness of Communication Approaches in the Case Study

Effective communication is important in addressing ethical dilemmas in practice. Dr. Kerr demonstrated effective communication approaches in helping Ana’s parents understand her views towards vaccination. Accordingly, Dr. Kerr utilized active listening and adopted a non-judgmental approach in communicating with the parents. Dr. Kerr took her time to listen to the reasons the parents had towards decline vaccination of their daughter. Active listening helped her to understand the attitude, beliefs, and knowledge the parents had towards vaccination. Active listening also provided her an effective basis for responding to them (Bester, 2022). Dr. Kerr also demonstrated open-mindedness by not making conclusions without considering their views. As a result, she was non-judgmental in expressing her views towards vaccination, which made the parents comfortable in the process. Therefore, healthcare providers should demonstrate openness, transparency, and practice effective communication approaches to build trust with their patients. Family or patient-centered education should also be adopted to facilitate informed decision-making. Patient or family-centered education contributes to optimum outcomes such as safety, quality, and efficiency in the treatment process (Adewale et al., 2019).

Resolving the Ethical Dilemma by Applying Ethical Principles

Ethical Principles are guidelines to help healthcare professional to work and decide through difficult situation and to provide them with better direction on their decision. In this case, study, Dr. Kerr must use the ethical principle of beneficence, autonomy and non-maleficence. Autonomy is the ethical principle that recognizes that patients have the right to make independent decisions. The healthcare providers should not attribute the decisions made to actions such as coercion. Healthcare providers can only make decisions for patients if they do not have the capacity to do so (Bester, 2022). Dr. Kerr recognizes the role of parents’ decision on whether their child should be vaccinated or not. Ana is also below 18 years, implying that the decisions of the parents should be respected. Dr. Kerr respects the autonomy of the parents by not imposing on them the decision they need to adopt.

Dr. Kerr also has to consider the ethical principle of non-maleficence. Non-maleficence entails do no harm to the patient. Dr. Kerr advocates Ana’s vaccination since she believes that it will protect her from diseases. However, she has no influence in the decisions made since the parents have the right to decide for their daughter (Bester, 2022). Therefore, it is important that Dr. Kerr requests the parents to provide her the source of their information and educate them about the credible sources of information they should use in the future. Educating parents will enhance their awareness about the health needs of their daughter, hence, the promotion of beneficence principle of doing good to others.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Dr. Kerr should continue to advocate for the patient by educating the parents gradually to an evidence base topic regarding vaccination, rather than opinion base. Healthcare Professionals play crucial roles in maintaining the public trust in vaccination, including addressing the parent’s concern. Dr. Kerr should also consider the parents feelings toward vaccination but must present data and documentation to contradict their beliefs. Through it, Ana’s p