Case Study: Restraint in Dementia Care

This case study examines the ethical considerations surrounding the placement of an IV line in Mr. X, a patient with vascular dementia who refuses treatment due to dysphagia. The conflict arises between respecting Mr. X's autonomy and the beneficence of providing necessary nutrition and medication via IV. The case study applies the Principlism ethical framework, considering autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, fidelity, justice, and confidentiality. The solution explores the potential benefits of IV therapy for improving Mr. X's nutritional intake while acknowledging his desire to avoid the procedure. Counseling is suggested to improve communication, reduce mood swings and depression, and encourage food intake.

Running head: RESTRAINT
Restraint
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1RESTRAINT
Summary
Vascular dementia is one of the progressive forms of dementia that is causing
deterioration and diminishing of quality of life of the people above the age of 65 years. In this
form of dementia, patients are disinclined to eat and take medications as they might be suffering
from dysphagia. Globally, there are 46.8 million people suffering from dementia and likely to
increase to 81 million by 2040. There is progressive loss of memory and improper functioning of
brain that gives rise to challenging behaviour and aggression.
In the case study of Mr X, there is requirement of IV channel placement as she is
disinclined to eat. However, he removed the IV channel and is deprived of adequate nutrition and
medication. On the other hand, to improve his nutrition and health, it is important to place IV.
However, it poses ethical issues in regard to its placement as to whether provide him IV or not.
When IV was given, it violated his respect for autonomy whereas its placement insisted
beneficence promoting welfare of the patient and support nutrition.
At the aged care facilities regarding IV channel placement, there are ethical issues of
respect for autonomy and beneficence. His independent say is hampered with forceful IV
placement whereas its placement promotes beneficence. The ethical framework containing
Principlism of Beneficence like Autonomy, Justice, and Non- maleficence, Fidelity, Justice and
Confidentiality is employed in the given case study. The IV implications for practice depicts that
it is beneficial for Mr. X to improve his nutritional intake and at the same time, he wants to stay
in peace and disapproves IV insertion. Therefore, counseling can be given to to increase the
communication ability and decrease mood swings and depression and gain interest in life and
consume food daily.