How would you respond to this ethical / moral thought experiment?

Question

A man and woman enter an emergency room, the woman aiding the man who is ill and barely able to walk.

A nurse comes out and helps the sick man into a room, then asks the woman to wait in the waiting room.

The man protests and tearfully asks that she be allowed into the examining room with them. The nurse asks her, "Are you his wife?" The woman replies, "No, but we live together."

The nurse states the hospital policy that only those who are legally next of kin are allowed into examinations.

The man begins to cry, perhaps from pain; he is too weak to protest, but the woman begs to be allowed to come along.

The nurse again states hospital policy that she's not allowed into the examining room, primarily because only next of kin were allowed to help make medical decisions. She could serve no role in those decisions.

WAS THE HOSPITAL'S POLICY ETHICALLY CORRECT?
WHAT RESPONSE WOULD YOUR FAITH SUGGEST TO THIS DILEMMA?

Answer 1

Ethically correct? Don't think so. Any treatment the hospital gave the man would be 100 times more efficient if he'd had her with him--she not being blood or marriage related, was still family-- CHOSEN family. This sort of thing breaks my heart. I'd have broken the rules.

Answer 2

Interesting question. I don't feel faith has a place in this dilemma. Policies in the health care field involve liability and safety first or they can't get a license or funding to operate. I think there is a part that is already a sympathetic factor with the allowance of legally next of kin (common law is legal also in some areas).
Just another thought, sometimes there are scenarios where a nightmare exists when someone can be part of a patients care for unscrupulous reasons.
I may respond in an moral-ethics way if I were one of the two entering the emergency room; even if I do realize the responsibility of the medical facility.

Answer 3

With this setup the hospital rules may sound cruel but they could find themselves in a huge legal mess if they let an unrelated person make life and death decisions.

What if she says no heroic treatment and he dies, then it turns out that she is not at all who she claims to be, perhaps she is manipulating him in his weakened state in is really after his money. When his kids find out that the hospital allowed her to make this decision? Here come the law suits.

I know of one satiation where an elderly man was visiting his cousin. When the man got sick the cousin said he was the man’s only living relative. Not true. The man had a wife and several children. The man ended up in a terrible nursing home and when the kids finally found out what was going on, the whole thing had turned into such a big mess they spent about a year of legal maneuvering to work it out.

Knowing that law suits are likely, and that some people may have less than honorable reasons for making life or death decisions, I think a hospital has a right to set rules.

Answer 4

In this instance, unless the couple can establish a common-law marriage, or a court-sanctioned power of attourney, the hospital is bound by their legal limits. BOUND. They cannot violate them. It is ethical to stick to the rules, even if the rules can seem heartless sometimes. Both parties (the hospital as well as the patient) must protect themselves legally. This is how it is done.

In a medical emergency, the woman could also get in the way of the doctors and nurses, just by trying to comfort the man in her care. That must also be considered. If he has an acute condition, and needs emergency care, the best thing she can do is GET OUT OF THE WAY and contact a family member for him.

Out of compassion for the patient, the woman should step aside and let the medical staff do their jobs. To ease her burden of care, the hospital staff should talk to the woman, to find out needed medical/personal information. Who has power of attourney? Does he have any allergies, pre-existing conditions, etc? Does she know anything about his medical insurance? She may not be able to be in an examination room with her sweetheart, but she can help as much as possible in the next room.

Answer 5

First, I've never had that problem, and I've been there many times...I'm glad too, cause I would have a freaking fit.

Second, no, I don't think it was ethically correct. The man should have a right to choose who he allows in the room with him. They should have offered a release form if necessary.

Third, I am an Atheist, so I have no faith. But, I can tell you that as a human being, my response would be to go into the room anyways. Also, let it be known to the public and everyone else that would listen, what kind of crap hospital would not allow someone who is seriously injured have their friend/loved one in the room with them. If they are of legal age, they have the right to choose.

It's ridiculous.

Answer 6

The ethics of ones faith is irrelevant to the ethics of business and law. The hospital invokes its set of ethics based on federal/state/local regulations and malpractice implications according to legal precedence. Therefore, provided the hospital follows all regulations as set forth and minimizes its business losses due to malpractice costs then it's decisions of policy would be ethically correct with regard to best business practice.

As for a 'faith based' suggestion to resolve any dilemma that the hospitals policy might bear burden on its patients, I would suggest policy address the morality issues of it's patients by waiver of responsibility. If patients' faiths or morals are allowed to circumvent business policy then I feel its only fair that those same patients wave all rights to hold liable the hospital for any and all incidents which could be attributable to said patients requests to circumvent standard operating procedures and policies of the service provider.

Answer 7

I don't think this is a faith issue - although it is a sin to be in that type of relationship without marriage. But I don't think that is the issue here. I've been in hospitals where it's not an issue at all - so there must be some kind of hospital rule developed over some frivolous lawsuit that caused this decision. The poor nurse was doing her job and probably did not have any choice.

Answer 8

They should have just said they were family. I don't think the hospital would check on that right at that moment, but I could be wrong. But if your ethics do not allow you to lie, then you would have a problem.
Personally I think that if the patient wants someone there they should be allowed in. I believe that is the ethical thing to do although my ethics could be different from others. I don't really have a faith to draw this conclusion form but there it is.

Answer 9

If he was a grown man and clearly wanted this lady with him the hospital SHOULD HAVE NO SAY. The only time I can see their policy being pushed is if someone is unconscious or something like that. Then maybe they would have to prove a relationship, but in your scenario there is no good reason to keep her out of the room if the man wants her there. My faith tells me people have free will for a reason.

Answer 10

Correct? No! She may have been the only one that was able to help him! No they are not married but she could have helped if there was some kind of medical neccessity. He could have just wanted her to be with him for support. If it were me, I would have let her in whether it was hospital policy or not.

Unfortunately, in the state I live in, a Marraige Ammendment was passed where it makes homosexual couples unable to become married. The sad thing is, is the way it was put, it hurts heterosexual couples that are not married and about 80% of Hmong couples who were not legally married in this country but married in their own country. The Hmong couples that got married in their home country, the sad thing is, is their marriage is not legal or recognised here now. So, not only do heterosexual couples that arent married have no say in the other persons health care if they were unable to speak for themselves but the Hmong couples don't have that either. Its sad that this state has done this just to hurt those that are homosexual. Hey if they aren't hurting me, then let them be. Some may disagree but, this is a free country and we are able to choose our faith, sexual orientation, and what we want to do with our lives.

Answer 11

The hospital must comply with state law, so it is ethically correct. If the policy needs to be changed, it should be done at the state level. I don't think living together is enough to allow her access (or make medical decisions). There must be a legal status to the relationship, or the hospital would be accountable to any problems arising from her presence. Hospitals try to avoid lawsuits for good reason, so they make precautions. Turn it around. What if you were drunk, bloody, and out of it, and some strange girl said she was your girlfriend, living with you; she gets to make medical decisions for you?

It would be interesting if you posted this question in the law section of YA.