Reference no: EM133677714

Assignment:

Julia is a 40-year-old female patient who experienced a stroke one month ago. For the last 10 years she had been living independently, in her own home. Since the stroke Julia needs help with all of her daily activities, and a recent assessment by a speech pathologist concludes that Julia cannot swallow safely, suggesting that she now requires an aphasic (soft food) diet. When the meal arrives and the nurse brings the food to Julia's mouth, she purses her lips and tells her to stop-she is angry and states she will not eat the soft foods. Julia tells the healthcare team that food, coffee, and the occasional glass of wine are among the few pleasures she has left in life and that to her taste, the soft diet and thickened fluids are unpalatable. Furthermore, she feels that the soft diet reduces her to feeling like a baby. Julia makes it clear that she wants the team to reorder a "normal" diet.

Some of the nurses on the unit do not feel comfortable feeding Julia something that she could potentially choke on. They fear that if Julia aspirates when they are helping her with a regular diet, they will be held responsible for her death; however, they know that if they only offer to feed her soft foods Julia will go on a hunger strike. Julia's partner Mark is very concerned about her safety and insists that the risk for choking is too high, and the healthcare team needs to take steps to maintain her nutritional status by inserting a feeding tube.

Briefly explain

• Outlines how 1-2 ethical theories were used to support understanding of the ethical issue. Virtue ethics and bioethics
• Describes the key considerations and application of these theories to the non-maleficence as an ethical issue and how the ethical theory(s) helped to clarify the issue.
• Provides an overview of how the ethics scholarly literature (minimum of 3 articles) has viewed and resolved similar ethical challenges. Links these views back to the theoretical lenses that were used to understand the ethical issue.
• Identification of ONE (1) ethical action that would support resolution of the ethical issue, which is non maleficence, using an ethical decision-making framework.
• Ensures the ethical action is supported by the nursing ethics literature.
• Describes how this ethical action aligns with the ethical theories used to analyze the case.
• Explores how the chosen action addresses the impact of biases, stereotypes, and systems of oppression that perpetuate inequities in care/practice