Application of Australian Law and Ethics in Healthcare: Tim's Case

This essay explores the relevance and application of Australian laws and ethical values in a case study involving a patient named Tim. The paper discusses moral principles and theories such as utilitarianism, deontology, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and autonomy, explaining their application to the case. It focuses on Australian legal issues in healthcare, particularly concerning patient rights and the duties of healthcare practitioners. The essay highlights the relationship between ethics and law, noting instances where they align and diverge, such as in the forced administration of morphine. Ultimately, it examines how these ethical and legal considerations impact patient care and the decision-making processes of healthcare professionals, with the goal of promoting quality healthcare within the bounds of both legal requirements and ethical principles. The website Desklib offers solved assignments and study tools for students.

Running head: LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 1
Law and Ethical Issues in Health Care
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 2
Introduction
Ethics is also called philosophical morality. It is an embodiment of philosophy dictating
the actions of human beings (Miraghaei, Shabani, & Shabani, 2014). Ethics quest to judge what
is wrong and right about an action. Furthermore, the moral values are systematic in its defense
and recommendation on an individual's conduct. Ethics offer solutions to the ethical questions
that a society might have concerning critical issues. The philosophical branch explains the
meaning of evil and ethical behavior.
Laws refer to the regulations and principles that govern a given community, country, or
region (Lim et al., 2015). The Australian authorities formulate the rules, and the citizens must
follow the doctrines. Laws and ethics differ slightly but share a majority of principles. Laws are
permanent regardless of the situation at hand. However, ethical concepts are flexible and can
transform to match with the current scenario.
This essay will discuss the relevance and application of Australian laws and ethical
values in Tim's case study. The paper will discuss the moral principles and theories, explaining
their use to the case study. Moreover, the essay will focus on Australian legal issues in
healthcare.
The relationship between ethics and law
The two commands are essential for health practitioners, whenever they are in their line
of duty. The therapeutic interdependency between clinicians and the patients is a critical part of
healthcare delivery in health facilities. An Australian practitioner who adheres to the laws and
ethical issues about medical attention builds a healthy relationship with the client (Johnstone,
2015). At the long run, efficient use of the two pillars improves the quality of healthcare.
Therefore, nurses must observe ethical reasoning and the laws of the Australia in the treatment

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 3
procedures (Strang, & Braithwaite, 2017). The case study will look at the legal and ethical issues
and how the two relate to the case study of Tim.
Tim is 32 years of age; he has a dislocated shoulder. Additionally, Tim has bruises on the
upper part of his body and all over his face. He has also suffered from lacerations of the scalp
which has opened deep wounds. Tim got injured when he got into a fight at a football game
played over the weekend. The emergency department of the hospital performed surgery on him
since his condition was worsening by the day. After the surgical procedures, Tim began to
indicate irrelevant symptoms such as violence, rudeness towards the nurses, and aggressive
behaviors.
The medical practitioners related the change in behavior to the pain that Tim was feeling
at the moment. The physician ordered the nurses to inject Tim with morphine forcefully. Nurses
collaborated in forcing the injection on Tim. The struggle to insert Tim resulted in breakage of
the needle inside Tim's body. Consequently, another operation proceeded to remove the stuck
needle. The condition led Tim to spend an additional month at the health facility.
Laws and ethics have a close relationship. The Australian Law provides principles that
act as bare minimums for the society. On the other hands, ethics provides an ideal platform for
adequate care. However, legal doctrines are essential for the application of ethical methods to be
a reality (Lydon, & Rizvi, 2016). In a few instances, ethical and legal principles disagree with
one another. A good example is when Australia legalizes assisted death, whereas ethically, the
action is wrong.
In the case study, Tim was rude and desired to return to the football pitch before the
completion of treatment. His actions prompted the practitioners at the health facility to ignore his
wish and inject him with morphine. The nurses administered the injection without considering

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 4
the requests of Tim. The action of the nurses is ethically wrong due to disobedience of
autonomy. However, injecting Tim to pave the way for further treatment is legally right since
every citizen should receive quality care. However, ethics provide the platform for arguments
and changes to suit a particular scenario.
Tim's scenario provides a specific ethical and legal dilemma. Forcing Tim with treatment
is contrary to the principle of Autonomy. However, when the nurses prematurely leave him to
resume his football career, he can acquire other complications due to unfinished attention. On the
other hand, the law requires that every citizen receives quality healthcare (Bennett, 2017).
Utilitarianism and Deontology
The two are major ethical theories that are relevant to the provision of care to patients in
Australia. The method of utilitarianism states that a moral action is one that brings the greatest
happiness to a large number of individuals (Barrow, 2015). Furthermore, the theory asserts that
the best effort should improve the health status of an individual. At the same time, individuals
should prevent the occurrence of illegal activities. Utilitarianism emanates from
consequentialism. Therefore, judgment of action should depend on its overall consequences. An
act which breeds desirable outcomes is preferable to one that yields an unwanted result. Thus,
individuals should carry out activities that generate total positivity to a large group of
individuals. People should ensure that their deeds maximize utility in an overall view. The
outcome of action matters more than the act itself according to utilitarian.
Deontology insists that the provision of care by nurses is the essential activity on the
hospital. The theory does not consider the consequences of an action. However, deontology
judges a move at the onset of implementation process (Charura, McFarlane, Walker, & Williams,
2017). An effort is either wrong or right regardless of the consequences. Therefore, medical

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 5
practitioners should do anything within their powers to offer treatment to the clients. No
circumstance, whether good or bad should prevent caregivers from administering care.
Deontologists claim that an action is wrong when the thinking of the doer, the
implementation, and the aftermath are all wrong. The vice versa is also true for the right move.
On the contrary, utilitarians bank on the consequences to judge whether a work is morally right
or wrong. The two theories have their flaws and strengths. However, there is need to consider the
strong points of the methods to enhance the quality of healthcare. Medical practitioners should
follow their conscience and at the same time adhere to professional codes of conduct in the
provision of care (Charura et al., 2017). Additionally, caregivers should consider socially,
cultural, and ethical values when offering care to the patients.
The two theories are relevant in the case study involving Tim. For utilitarians, the
consequences of an action are more important than the work itself. Therefore, utilitarians support
the nurses for injecting Tim with morphine since the result is to relieve him of pain. Moreover,
utilitarians focus on the aftermath of an action. Injection using morphine results into a good
ending as Tim receives all the necessary treatment. The theory does not emphasize how the
nurses conducted the therapy (Charura et al., 2017). In many occasions, it is essential to persuade
a patient in a friendly way before administering medication. Nurses require a legal permit from
the Australian government to offer injection forcefully. Caregivers have to provide quality care
in a manner that is peaceful. Australian Clinicians should also follow Deontological principles in
the issuance of medical treatment.
Ethical Principles
Beneficence

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 6
The principle insists on the need always to do good and at the same time prevent the
occurrence of harm (Beauchamp, 2016). Tim's situation issues a dilemma as far as beneficence is
concerned. The nurses achieve the desired outcome which is treatment. The excellent result
resonates with beneficence. However, the achievement of the conclusion follows a forceful
route, thus contradicting the principles. The dynamic injection makes Tim increase his stay at the
hospital for yet another surgical procedure. Therefore, the nurses achieve a desirable outcome
through the wrong means in the case study. Beneficence and utilitarianisms go hand in hand as
they both gun for beneficial results.
Nonmaleficence
The principle obligates individuals to refrain from harming others (Greenfield, & Jensen,
2016). The laws of beneficence and nonmaleficence are almost similar. Therefore, individuals
find a hard time to categorize them concerning their importance. In the case study, the rule of
nonmaleficence is less critical as compared to beneficence which assumes center stage. Tim has
no option but to undergo forceful injection since it is good for his recovery. The physician
intended to lower Tim's tension through morphine injection. The doctor had good motives
although the needle broke inside Tim's body. The needle incident handed Tim an additional one
month stay at the health facility. Therefore, the case study achieves beneficence while overriding
nonmaleficence.
Autonomy
The ethical principle of Autonomy demands respect for the opinion of an individual
(Meehan, & Landry, 2016). A patient should contribute to decision making, and the physicians
should respect their opinions. The physician should not whatsoever threaten, manipulate or force
the patient into making a wrong decision. Caregivers have the responsibility of acknowledging

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 7
and respecting the autonomy of the client. Additionally, the client should be of sound mind and
have the capability to make medical decisions. The physician should provide the client with
adequate and relevant information to enable them to conclude. Tim is not in a position to make a
decisive contribution to his treatment due to the aggression, violence, and the lack of cooperation
that he shows towards the caregivers. The physicians should make decisions for patients in the
conditions of Tim. Moreover, the government should allow caregivers to make the decisions
without legal restrictions.
Capacity
Capacity refers to the capability of a patient to make independent decisions without
undue pressure (Hein et al., 2015). Situations that can make individuals lose their capacity
include alcoholism, severe injury, and mental sickness. Additional causes of incapacity include
young age, abuse, the influence of drugs, and depression. The continuous state of vegetativeness
and the inability to learn also leads to disability (Katz, Webb, & C. O.B, 2016). The caregivers
should explain the consequences of methods of treatment to the clients. The methods include the
plan of treatment, options, merits and merits of the chosen strategy (Mancini et al., 2015). After
the explanation, the clinicians should allow the patients to make independent and informed
decisions (Bossaert et al., 2015). Tim is unable to make a critical decision on his treatment.
Therefore, the physicians are right to inject him with morphine.
Justice
The principle urges healthcare providers to offer equal medical attention to all patients
regardless of their ethnicity (Nukaga, 2016). The physicians obey the law of justice as they
attend to every client at the emergency department. Moreover, they offer quality treatment to the
patients in an equal measure. The physicians pay close attention to the nature of the

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 8
complications before providing exemplary care to the clients. Following the principle, the
physicians make Tim patient as he awaits admission into the operating segment.
Fidelity
The principle requires physicians to practice loyalty in the provision of health care
(Senter et al., 2018). Loyalty in treatment creates a therapeutic partnership between the
caregivers and the clients. Fidelity requires the physicians to exercise total concentration to their
duties. The principle is irrelevant in the case study that involves Tim. However, the doctor and
the nurses fulfill their obligation of ensuring that Tim gets well.
Paternalism
The concept requires caregivers to make treatment decisions that match the beliefs of the
clients (Schiavone, De Anna, Mameli, Rebba, & Boniolo, 2014). The Australian physicians
should ensure that the clients concur with their treatment suggestions. The concept of
paternalism is illegal and unethical in the modern world of healthcare. The illegality is because;
the idea denies the patient the free will of making decisions. The patients should stand their
grounds and use nonmaleficence and beneficence to combat paternalism. The autonomy and the
dignity of the client have slowly but surely taken the place of paternity (Schiavone et al., 2014).
The nurses must ensure that patients have informed consent before arriving at a decision. The
patients have the right to make their independent decisions after receiving relevant medical
information from the doctor. The ethical world puts a lot of emphasis on the respect towards the
client’s dignity and autonomy.
The ethical committees and the Australian legal courts have a role to play in dealing with
incapacitated clients. The two bodies should make viable decisions which would resonate with
the views of the patients in their standard states. Tim’s case disagrees with paternalism.

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 9
Therefore, the concept is irrelevant to the case study. Tim is incapacitated, and therefore
Autonomy is also irrelevant. Additionally, the nurses cannot listen to Tim's contributions as they
contradict the provision of quality care. However, the caregivers should not override the
decisions of the patients to favor their arguments (Schiavone et al., 2014). The Australian court is
an essential arbitrator in the case of Tim due to the ethical dilemma that exists. Tim's situation
requires urgent attention and the nurses would be ethically unwise to wait for the arbitrator
before making a decision. The clinicians must make right choices on behalf of the incapacitated
patient.
Tim was unruly to the care providers. Additionally, he was aggressive and violent
towards the nurses. The nurses had an obligation to manage the condition of Tim before
providing him with quality medical treatment. Tim's behavior was creating a difficult situation
for the caregivers to conduct medical treatment to Tim and the other clients. The nurses used
chemical means involuntarily to manage Tim. The intervention by the nurses is legally accepted
in the Australian constitution. However, chemical injection results into undesirable seductive
effects. The impacts include drowsiness and loss of appetite. Additionally, morphine injection
can cause mental sickness and dizziness (Schiavone et al., 2014). However, the nurses injected
Tim for his good. The Australian government has legalized the detention of an individual if the
action leads to the peace of others. The clinicians were right to inject Tim with the morphine
drug as the injection barred Tim from preventing medical treatment.
Consenting
The principle is a fundamental part of ethical logic. Consenting is only applicable when
the parties involved are capable and possess the necessary know-how to consent (Richter et al.,
2018). Appropriate consent enables clinicians to discharge their duties without legal

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 10
impairments. Battery refers to illegal touching of other individuals without their prior consent.
The condition is not permanent as it follows the surgical procedures. The patient show
symptoms that disappear after the effects of the anesthetics come to an end.
Double effect
The doctrine of the law allows the Australian caregivers to harm if their action delivers
desirable results (Runciman, Merry, & Walton, 2017). In other cases, ethical principles permit
the doctor to allow the patients to die, if the sedative drugs administered were to relieve pain. In
the case study, the nurses in conjunction with the nurses inject Tim with morphine contrary to his
wishes. The actions of the caregivers are justified as the injection is to the own good of Tim. The
morphine that the nurses used in the treatment process has seductive effects besides being an
active anesthetic drug. Moreover, it is clear that the performance of undesirable procedures to
incapacitated patients can cause an eventuality (Kasper et al., 2015). The situation is evident as
the needle breaks in the case study of Tim during the injection with morphine. The doctrine of
double effects applies to the case study as the infusion enhances the treatment of Tim. However,
the injection causes the breakage of the needle which is harmful to the patient.
The necessity doctrine
The doctrine gives caregivers the go-ahead to administer treatment to incapacitated
patients (Gooding, & Flynn, 2015). The nurses have the right to make treatment decisions on
behalf of such patients. The caregivers must administer treatment to incapacitated patients with
or without their consent. The doctrine is highly applicable in the case study of Tim. Surgery is a
must though the patient is unable to make informed decisions about the treatment options.
Tort

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 11
Tort is another Australian law that applies to the case study involving Tim. The action is
wrong in right corners as it consists in injuring another individual (Gostin, & Wiley, 2016). The
injured individual has the legal right to report the offender to the authorities. In some cases, Tort
occurs as a result of negligence. The term negligence refers to the omission of essential
responsibility of an individual by themselves. On the other hand, battery refers to the act of
physically injuring another party (Hall, Orentlicher, Bobinski, Bagley, & Cohen, 2018). The
person perpetrates the action without the prior consent of the recipient. An individual who
commits the two offenses should answer to court charges.
The care providers have the sole responsibility to provide quality medical treatment to
Tim. If the clinicians fail to offer the best medical attention to Tim, then the patient should sue
them for negligence. The battery is also irrelevant in the case study. The clinicians expose Tim to
the effects of battery, but their actions are to help him. Ethical and legal principles allow the
clinicians to tort the patient if it is for the good of the client.
Conclusion
Ethical and legal principles are essential for any practice in any fields in Australia. The
adherence to the two pillars ensures the provision of quality care to the patients. Caregivers
should follow their own beliefs and those of patient before offering medical treatment. In the
case of the Tim, there are applicable and irrelevant legal and ethical principles. The theories of
utilitarianism and deontology have to take precedence in treatment. Adherence to the ethical
theories ensures quality issuance of medical treatment. The care providers must also follow the
doctrines of autonomy, beneficence, and justice. Nonmaleficence and fidelity are also assuring
quality treatment to the patients.

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 12
Caregivers need to observe legal issues in their line of duty. The doctrines of tort and
battery undermine the rights of Tim. However, the situation of Tim necessitates the clinicians to
reject both tort and battery doctrines. Therefore, the clinicians should observe all the ethical and
legal issues in treatment. The essential principles are those of beneficence, autonomy,
nonmaleficence, and justice. The other laws such as those of fidelity are also critical in medical
treatment.

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 13
References
Barrow, R. (2015). Utilitarianism: A contemporary statement. Routledge.
Beauchamp, T. L. (2016). Principlism in Bioethics. In Bioethical Decision Making and
Argumentation (pp. 1-16). Springer, Cham.
Bennett, B. (2017). Health law's kaleidoscope: Health law rights in a global age. Routledge.
Bossaert, L. L., Perkins, G. D., Askitopoulou, H., Raffay, V. I., Greif, R., Haywood, K. L., ... &
Georgiou, M. (2015). European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015:
Section 11. The ethics of resuscitation and end-of-life decisions. Resuscitation, 95, 302-
311.
Charura, D., McFarlane, K., Walker, B., & Williams, G. A. (2017, April). Above all, not harm:
Towards more ethical ways of being and acting in the psychological formulation. In
Clinical Psychology Forum. The British Psychological Society.
Gooding, P., & Flynn, E. (2015). Querying the call to introduce mental capacity testing to mental
health law: Does the doctrine of necessity provide an alternative?. Laws, 4(2), 245-271.
Gostin, L. O., & Wiley, L. F. (2016). Public health law: power, duty, restraint. Univ of
California Press.
Greenfield, B. H., & Jensen, G. M. (2016). Understanding the lived experiences of patients:
Application of a phenomenological approach to ethics. Physical Therapy, 90(8), 1185-
1197.
Hall, M. A., Orentlicher, D., Bobinski, M. A., Bagley, N., & Cohen, I. G. (2018). Health care
law and ethics. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 14
Hein, I. M., Troost, P. W., Broersma, A., De Vries, M. C., Daams, J. G., & Lindauer, R. J.
(2015). Why is it hard to make progress in assessing children’s decision-making
competence?. BMC medical ethics, 16(1), 1.
Johnstone, M. J. (2015). Bioethics: a nursing perspective. Elsevier Health Sciences.
Kasper, D., Fauci, A., Hauser, S., Longo, D., Jameson, J., & Loscalzo, J. (2015). Harrison's
principles of internal medicine, 19e.
Katz, A. L., Webb, S. A., & Committee on Bioethics. (2016). Informed consent in decision-
making in pediatric practice. Pediatrics, e20161485.
Lim, Y. Y., Villemagne, V. L., Laws, S. M., Pietrzak, R. H., Snyder, P. J., Ames, D., ... & Rowe,
C. C. (2015). APOE and BDNF polymorphisms moderate amyloid β-related cognitive
decline in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. Molecular Psychiatry, 20(11), 1322.
Lydon, J., & Rizvi, U. Z. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of postcolonial archaeology. Routledge.
Mancini, M. E., Diekema, D. S., Hoadley, T. A., Kadlec, K. D., Leveille, M. H., McGowan, J.
E., ... & Sinz, E. H. (2015). Part 3: Ethical Issues. Circulation, 132(18 suppl 2), S383-
S396.
Meehan, W. P., & Landry, G. L. (2016). Reason and Autonomy. Pediatrics, e20160047B.
Miraghaei, S., Shabani, V., & Shabani, V. (2014). The Foundation of Moral Relationship
Marketing Approach with the Axis of the Virtue Ethics. Kuwait Chapter of the Arabian
Journal of Business and Management Review, 3(12A), 60.
Nukaga, Y. (2016). Ethics Expertise and Public Credibility: A Case Study of the Ethical
Principles of Justice. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(4), 709-731.

LAW AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH CARE 15
Richter, G., Krawczak, M., Lieb, W., Wolff, L., Schreiber, S., & Buyx, A. (2018). Broad consent
for health care–embedded biobanking: understanding and reasons to donate in a large
patient sample. Genetics in Medicine, 20(1), 76.
Runciman, B., Merry, A., & Walton, M. (2017). Safety and ethics in healthcare: a guide to
getting it right. CRC Press.
Schiavone, G., De Anna, G., Mameli, M., Rebba, V., & Boniolo, G. (2014). Libertarian
paternalism and health care policy: a deliberative proposal. Medicine, Health Care and
Philosophy, 17(1), 103-113.
Senter, L., Bennett, R. L., Madeo, A. C., Noblin, S., Ormond, K. E., Schneider, K. W., ... &
Virani, A. (2018). National Society of genetic counselors code of ethics: Explication of
2017 revisions. Journal of genetic counseling, 27(1), 9-15.
Strang, H., & Braithwaite, J. (Eds.). (2017). Restorative justice: Philosophy to practice.
Routledge.