Reference no: EM133376818

Case:

A recent immigrant to the United States from Mexico enters a doctor's office with a complaint of symptoms that seem like diabetes. She can speak basic English and provide some details about her condition but isn't able to read English very well. The doctor performs a test and determines she has early stage type 2 diabetes. There is a new medication on the market designed to reverse this condition and the doctor thinks the new patient is a perfect candidate for a medical trial he is involved in administering. He gives the patient an informed consent form that details all aspects of the trial, including that she could be given a placebo medication instead of the new prescription. He does not detail all the aspects of the trial verbally but does mention a few key risks. He asks the patient if she has questions, and she shakes her head no and signs the form. She is given the placebo drug and her condition worsens. Later, her daughter, who is an English-speaking, U.S.-born citizen, calls the office and asks for clarifying details about the trial on behalf of her mother. The medical staff understands her concern and informs the daughter that her mother is taking the placebo medication.

The patient consented to treatment (why?), however, there may be potential HIPAA violations (which are....).

The patient did not consent to treatment (why?), and there are HIPAA violations (which are.....).

Question 1: Did the patient consent to treatment? Explain why or why not.

Question 2: Describe any HIPAA violations or potential violations.

Question 3: What risks are involved for the physician? What about the patient?

Based on the class debate, It must also include the ethical principle(s) that apply using Lowenberg and Dolgoff's hierarchy for ethical decision-making.

Did you change your mind? What other ideas/arguments did you hear that you did not previously consider? If you did not change your mind, why?