University Nursing Case Study: Christianity and Ethical Principles

This nursing case study explores ethical considerations within a healthcare context, specifically examining a scenario involving an 8-year-old patient requiring a kidney transplant. The case delves into the principles of non-maleficence, beneficence, and autonomy, analyzing the decisions made by the patient's parents and the ethical implications thereof. The study further integrates a Christian worldview, analyzing how Christian principles such as 'call to family, community, and participation,' 'right and responsibility,' and 'care of God’s creation' are applied and prioritized in the context of the patient's treatment. The analysis highlights the significance of non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy within a Christian framework, emphasizing the parents' reliance on faith and the ethical complexities surrounding decisions involving the patient and potential donors, particularly the patient's twin brother. The case study includes a discussion of contextual features, such as the parents' faith and the role of the church, providing a comprehensive ethical analysis of the case.

Running head: Nursing and Christian
Nursing Case study and Christianity
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Authors Note

1Nursing Case Study and Christianity
Part 1
Chart
Medical Indication Patient Preferences
Nonmaleficence and Beneficence Autonomy
Beneficence focuses on best interventions for
the patient. Whereas non-maleficence ensure
avoid harms or negative side effects related to
treatment (Bronzino & Peterson, 2016). Parents
of the patient tried their best to give him the best
treatment and they knew that James's condition
could be worse if not treated. They had no
intention to harm their son purposefully.
Autonomy ensures to prioritise decision of
patients and their families. Autonomy focuses
on the right of the person to confirm the
decisions for his or her medical condition
(Sabatello et al., 2018). James is an 8 year-old
kid and cannot practice autonomy. His parents
took decision about his treatment but should
have asked him whether he was comfortable
with the treatment procedure.
Quality of Life Contextual Features
Nonmaleficence, Beneficence and Autonomy Justice and Fairness
Quality of life symbolises the condition of
patient before and after the treatment (Majid et
al.,2017). After having continuous dialysis
James's condition improved. Kidney transplant
was required for betterment of his condition.
However, his parents faced difficulties to get
proper donor for him and later they came to
know that his brother could be the best option as
kidney donor. His parents were dependent on
Contextual features are dependent on social,
familial, legal and economical condition related
to patient's medical decisions. James's parents
had faith on prayers for their religious nature.
Therefore, they believed that prayer could heal
him and kept faith despite allowing him to have
kidney transplant from his brother. Equality can
be established by justice and fairness(Resnik et
al.,2018). When they found Samuel is the

2Nursing Case Study and Christianity
their faith which acted as the best interest during
kidney transplant of James.
perfect match for James's kidney transplant,
they took decision of behalf of Samuel. As a
result, conflicts of interest was observed
because Samuel's decisions were not taken
under consideration.
Part 2
Q1. According to the Christian worldview, which of the principles is most pressing in the
case? Explain why.
This case study has shown that the parents of James are dependent on the healing
services of Church. They believed in services of church, whichare mostly related to the
human beliefs and values. Here, the principle related to “call to family, community and
participation” is prominent in this case study. Additionally, “right and responsibility” can be
observedduring the treatment of the patient. The patient was taken to the church to get
treatment with holistic approach as Church serves people and believes to maintain good
health of community. The parents of the patient was also very much convinced by solidarity
approach of Church. Friends, family and even the church members agreed to become donor
for James. It has been observedthat “the care of God’s creation” is related to the case scenario
prominently as after putting significant amount of effort James’s parents were not able to
arrange proper donor for him. According to the principle of God’s creation, every living
being of this earth is protected by the almighty and living in faith is the key factor of
existence. However, they found James’s twin brother could be a proper kidney donor for

3Nursing Case Study and Christianity
him.Mike, the father of the patient had faith on God, believes that human life is the gift of
God, and for this reason, Samuel turned out to be the potential donor of James.
Q.2. According to the Christian worldview how might a Christian rank the priority of the four
principles? Explain why.
Non-maleficence is the most preferred principle in terms of treatment of a Christian
patient. After non-maleficence, justice and fairness can be considered as the preferred
principle. Autonomy is the last considerable principle during treatment of a patient.
According to Christians, parents should consider their children at the first place and show
their love and affection in the highest level. The parent should not harm their children, in any
circumstances and this only comes under the principle of non-maleficence. Christians should
practice justice and fairness in every stage of their lives and they should not break this
tendency in point of their lives. They believe that every person should have the chance to
prove their selves and take decisions to lead a better life. Giving another chance to an
individual can consider as an associated principle of autonomy.

4Nursing Case Study and Christianity
References
Bronzino, J. D., & Peterson, D. R. (2016). Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, and Medical
Technology. In Tissue Engineering and Artificial Organs (pp. 1259-1266). CRC
Press.
Majid, A., Sayeed, B. Z., Khan, M., Lakhani, M., Saleem, M. M., Rajani, H., ... & Majid, B.
(2017). Assessment and improvement of quality of life in patients undergoing
treatment for head and neck cancer. Cureus, 9(5).
Resnik, D. B., MacDougall, D. R., & Smith, E. M. (2018). Ethical dilemmas in protecting
susceptible subpopulations from environmental health risks: Liberty, utility, fairness,
and accountability for reasonableness. The American Journal of Bioethics, 18(3), 29-
41.
Sabatello, M., Janvier, A., Verhagen, E., Morrison, W., & Lantos, J. (2018). Pediatric
Participation in Medical Decision Making: Optimized or Personalized?.