When it comes to Case 4, I thought that Patrick's desire to have his healthy tissue removed was ethically wrong because there was no significant issues or imminent future problems with his teeth so there is no reason for him to get this tissue removed. Question 1: No, I believe there is no difference between the physician-patient relationship and dentist-patient relationship, because they both are professionally and ethically responsible for their patients.Question 2: No, the endodontist should not accede to Patrick's desires, because it goes against what his dentist believes to be ethically correct; and since dentist's are required to follow ethical guidelines it is wrong for the dentist to give into his Patrick's desires; especially when there is no current or imminent future issues with his teeth.
In this case, Patrick M. is asking for a procedure that is completely ridiculous and almost hypochondriacal. Patrick wants to prevent future toothaches from occurring but clearly does not care about the consequences of the procedure itself. While the patient has a right to demand that a procedure be done, the physician/dentist has a right to refuse to do this procedure. In response to question 1, no I do not believe that there is a difference between the dentist-patient and physician-patient relationship. Both the physician and the dentist have a moral, ethical, and occupational responsibility to inform the patient on what is best for his or her well being. The endodontist is ethically required to tell Patrick that the consequences/risks of the procedure outweigh the good that can come of it. The endodontist is very likely more knowledgeable on the subject and should thus share what he knows and his opinion with the patient. In response to question 2, if Patrick still wants the surgery knowing the consequences, it would not be wrong for the endodontist to proceed with the surgery; however, as I said before, the endodontist also has a right to refuse to perform that surgery. I don’t think that it would be wrong for the endodontist to refuse in light of the fact that it is an unethical surgery and that the endodontist doesn’t want any bad things that come of the procedure on his/her conscience.
So no, I don't think that the endodontist should accede to his desires (because the procedure is unethical and does not contribute to the patient's well being), but it would not be wrong for the endodontist to proceed with the surgery.
Personally and ethically I do not believe that it would be appropriate for the dentist to perform a root canal. Patrick M does not present with a viable need for such a procedure, nor would he suffer any perceivable consequences from not having the procedure. It would be unethical on behalf of the dentist because significant risk is present with the procedure. The ethical responsibility of the dentist in the dentist-patient relationship is the same as the ethical responsibility in the physician patient relationship. Physicians abide by the the phrase "Primum non nocere," or "first do no harm." Performing the root canal would violate this principal of medical ethics. This does make me question the viability of several other medical procedures, such as unnecessary (not for deformity) plastic surgery. Plastic surgery for a "face lift" or "nose job" has no medical benefit to the patient other than their personally perceived improved appearance. Significant risk of infection can result from these surgeries posing harm to the patient. If plastic surgery is perceived as ethically acceptable based upon the unnecessary want of the patient, how does this differ from the the unnecessary want for a root canal?
I believe that the dentist should not continue with Patrick's requested surgery and potentially destroy perfectly healthy tissue. The dentist-patient relationship is in no form or fashion any different than the physician-patient relationship, in the manner that the first responsibility of the dentist (who is a doctor) is to properly care for the patient at hand. If the dentist were to accede with his patient's request, he would be exacerbating the opportunity for additional problems and treatment in the future, whether Patrick is fully aware of this or not. It is also the responsibility of the dentist to fully inform the patient of the negative aspects of his "foolproof" plan. Patrick would just be setting himself up for immense pain and healthcare costs, and the dentist would be to blame for this, even if this was solely Patrick's plan. The dentist was the one in the end to allow Patrick to carry out his detrimental plan.
I think that Patrick is capable of making his own decision even if, as Tim said, he is a hypochondriac. If he wants to go through with the difficult procedures and pay out of his pocket, then I do not see the problem with it. The teeth are his and if he wants to have them all pulled so that he has none left, then he should be able to do that as long as he can pay. Like Evan said, people pay tons of money to have unnecessary plastic surgery done. I believe that there is a difference between a dentist-patient relationship and the physician-patient relationship. Asking to have all the root canals is not the same as asking a physician to have a transplant of every organ. Yes, there is still a level of risk, but I think that there are different ones in each situation. If mentally this does make a difference for the patient then maybe it will help the patient's well being. I think that they endodontist should go ahead with the procedure as long as Patrick understands what is involved with the procedure and is will to pay.
Although it's not explicitly implied in the case study, I think you have to account for the possibility that Patrick may have a mental illness which may impair his judgment. It is not a rational thought to have to endure numerous root canals which would cause significant pain simply for the prevention of potential future toothache. Mental illnesses such as Schizophrenia can cause delusions and poor judgment which could lead to this type of request. Whether Patrick understands what is involved and the consequences, it simply is not a rational decision. Despite the fact that I think that it shouldn't be performed due to the risk to the patient, I also think the dentist should evaluate the judgment and mental status if he were even to consider the procedure.
I believe that because there is no reason for the procedure to be done then the endodontist should not agree to perform the procedure. By having all of his teeth desensitized then he will never be aware of when something is wrong which can lead to bigger problems in the future. This is an unnecessary procedure that would not provide any health benefits to the patient in the future and there are no justifiable means for it to be done currently. The dentist should instead educate the patient about why this is not a good plan and why he needs to keep the healthy tissue the way it is. There should be no difference between the dentist-patient relationship and a physician-patient relationship. They both serve the purpose of providing care to their clients. They are both practicing doctors that are required to follow the same guidelines of morality with their patients.
First of all I do not think there is a difference between physician-patient relationship and dentist-patient relationship. Both have to abide by the laws of doctor-patient relationships. They both also have the responsibility to care for their patients to the best of their ability and what is in the best interest of the patient. So making the decision whether or not to pull Patrick’s teeth would be a hard decision. You want to please the patient, but you have to follow what is ethically right. In this instance if Patrick wants his teeth pulled and knows the consequences of it, I do not think that there is a problem in having the surgery. It is ultimately however the dentists decision whether or not he is comfortable doing it. The dentist could always reject Patrick, and Patrick could try to find a different dentist to do it.
In response to question (1), there is no difference between the dentist-patient and physician-patient relationship considering both a dentist and a physician have the responsibility of consulting with the patient regarding the specified issue on or in the patient's body. Whether this body part is the brain or teeth, the manner in which the professional addresses the patient should be ethically the same, although the exact actions are obviously going to vary based on the situation. A dentist cares for the teeth and mouth, both of which are vital and necessary for a human to live a well and healthy life.
As for question (2), Patrick M. has the right to request a root canal on each of his teeth and the endodontist is responsible to inform Patrick of the potential risks associated with the procedure. But, aware of the danger of the situation, the endodontist also has the right to refuse to perform the root canals based on his knowledge of the possible infection and damage to healthy tissue. If, after being denied by the first endodontist, Patrick is able to find another endodontist who is willing to perform the root canals, the procedure is then ethical. Just as Evan introduced above, cosmetic plastic surgery is not necessary and is still routinely conducted, even with the notable health risks. Patrick's request falls under the exact same category.
1. The dentist-patient relationship and physician patient relationship have no significant differences. They both are health professionals with doctorate degrees in a specific area. In each relationship, the health professional must consult the patient in order to do what is best for them in the particular situation. The health professional cannot perform a surgery or operation without consent. The patient must give the consent before the operation is completed.
2. The endodontist should not accede to Patricks M's desires. Patrick M's blood vessels and nerves are not damaged or diseased, therefor they do not need the operation for survival. It would be unethical for the endodontist to perdorm the procedure on healthy tissue. Patrick M has no signs that he will ever have a problem with the tissue in his teeth. If the vessels or nerves become infected and cause Patrick M to experience pain, then he can return to the office to have a root canal done on his teeth.
1. I do not believe there is a difference between doctor patient relationship and dentist patient relationship. Dentists have the same role in a patients life as a physician does. The well being of the patient is in the hands of the dentist just the same as the patients well being is in the hands of a physician, just a different area of the patients well being. It is the responsibility of both the dentist and physician to make the decision to do what is best for the patient, and not do something that will cause problems for the patient later.
2. I believe that the dentist should not accede to Patricks desires in this case. The desires of Patrick are unreasonable because there is no reason to believe that there will be anything wrong with his teeth or the government in the future. Even if Patrick believes it is best for him, the dentist, who has a greater amount of knowledge in the area, thinks it is unnecessary, as well as unethical and wrong. Therefore, the dentist should not perform the procedure because it is, in his own belief, unnecessary and unethical.
1. I do not think there is a difference between the doctor patient and dentist patient relationship. Both work in the healthcare system to provide care for the public. They both deal with the well being of the patient which is up to them to make the appropriate decision for the patient.
2. I do not think the dentist should do the procedure. Dentists and doctors alike have to take the hypocratic oath which fist states do no harm. The procedure although routine still has risks of complications and infections. These risks are un-nessisary when it is not warranted thus going against the oath to do no harm.
When it comes to Case 4, I thought that Patrick's desire to have his healthy tissue removed was ethically wrong because there was no significant issues or imminent future problems with his teeth so there is no reason for him to get this tissue removed. Question 1: No, I believe there is no difference between the physician-patient relationship and dentist-patient relationship, because they both are professionally and ethically responsible for their patients.Question 2: No, the endodontist should not accede to Patrick's desires, because it goes against what his dentist believes to be ethically correct; and since dentist's are required to follow ethical guidelines it is wrong for the dentist to give into his Patrick's desires; especially when there is no current or imminent future issues with his teeth.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, Patrick M. is asking for a procedure that is completely ridiculous and almost hypochondriacal. Patrick wants to prevent future toothaches from occurring but clearly does not care about the consequences of the procedure itself. While the patient has a right to demand that a procedure be done, the physician/dentist has a right to refuse to do this procedure. In response to question 1, no I do not believe that there is a difference between the dentist-patient and physician-patient relationship. Both the physician and the dentist have a moral, ethical, and occupational responsibility to inform the patient on what is best for his or her well being. The endodontist is ethically required to tell Patrick that the consequences/risks of the procedure outweigh the good that can come of it. The endodontist is very likely more knowledgeable on the subject and should thus share what he knows and his opinion with the patient. In response to question 2, if Patrick still wants the surgery knowing the consequences, it would not be wrong for the endodontist to proceed with the surgery; however, as I said before, the endodontist also has a right to refuse to perform that surgery. I don’t think that it would be wrong for the endodontist to refuse in light of the fact that it is an unethical surgery and that the endodontist doesn’t want any bad things that come of the procedure on his/her conscience.
ReplyDeleteSo no, I don't think that the endodontist should accede to his desires (because the procedure is unethical and does not contribute to the patient's well being), but it would not be wrong for the endodontist to proceed with the surgery.
ReplyDeletePersonally and ethically I do not believe that it would be appropriate for the dentist to perform a root canal. Patrick M does not present with a viable need for such a procedure, nor would he suffer any perceivable consequences from not having the procedure. It would be unethical on behalf of the dentist because significant risk is present with the procedure. The ethical responsibility of the dentist in the dentist-patient relationship is the same as the ethical responsibility in the physician patient relationship. Physicians abide by the the phrase "Primum non nocere," or "first do no harm." Performing the root canal would violate this principal of medical ethics. This does make me question the viability of several other medical procedures, such as unnecessary (not for deformity) plastic surgery. Plastic surgery for a "face lift" or "nose job" has no medical benefit to the patient other than their personally perceived improved appearance. Significant risk of infection can result from these surgeries posing harm to the patient. If plastic surgery is perceived as ethically acceptable based upon the unnecessary want of the patient, how does this differ from the the unnecessary want for a root canal?
ReplyDeleteI believe that the dentist should not continue with Patrick's requested surgery and potentially destroy perfectly healthy tissue. The dentist-patient relationship is in no form or fashion any different than the physician-patient relationship, in the manner that the first responsibility of the dentist (who is a doctor) is to properly care for the patient at hand. If the dentist were to accede with his patient's request, he would be exacerbating the opportunity for additional problems and treatment in the future, whether Patrick is fully aware of this or not. It is also the responsibility of the dentist to fully inform the patient of the negative aspects of his "foolproof" plan. Patrick would just be setting himself up for immense pain and healthcare costs, and the dentist would be to blame for this, even if this was solely Patrick's plan. The dentist was the one in the end to allow Patrick to carry out his detrimental plan.
ReplyDeleteI think that Patrick is capable of making his own decision even if, as Tim said, he is a hypochondriac. If he wants to go through with the difficult procedures and pay out of his pocket, then I do not see the problem with it. The teeth are his and if he wants to have them all pulled so that he has none left, then he should be able to do that as long as he can pay. Like Evan said, people pay tons of money to have unnecessary plastic surgery done. I believe that there is a difference between a dentist-patient relationship and the physician-patient relationship. Asking to have all the root canals is not the same as asking a physician to have a transplant of every organ. Yes, there is still a level of risk, but I think that there are different ones in each situation. If mentally this does make a difference for the patient then maybe it will help the patient's well being. I think that they endodontist should go ahead with the procedure as long as Patrick understands what is involved with the procedure and is will to pay.
ReplyDeleteAlthough it's not explicitly implied in the case study, I think you have to account for the possibility that Patrick may have a mental illness which may impair his judgment. It is not a rational thought to have to endure numerous root canals which would cause significant pain simply for the prevention of potential future toothache. Mental illnesses such as Schizophrenia can cause delusions and poor judgment which could lead to this type of request. Whether Patrick understands what is involved and the consequences, it simply is not a rational decision. Despite the fact that I think that it shouldn't be performed due to the risk to the patient, I also think the dentist should evaluate the judgment and mental status if he were even to consider the procedure.
ReplyDeleteI believe that because there is no reason for the procedure to be done then the endodontist should not agree to perform the procedure. By having all of his teeth desensitized then he will never be aware of when something is wrong which can lead to bigger problems in the future. This is an unnecessary procedure that would not provide any health benefits to the patient in the future and there are no justifiable means for it to be done currently. The dentist should instead educate the patient about why this is not a good plan and why he needs to keep the healthy tissue the way it is.
ReplyDeleteThere should be no difference between the dentist-patient relationship and a physician-patient relationship. They both serve the purpose of providing care to their clients. They are both practicing doctors that are required to follow the same guidelines of morality with their patients.
First of all I do not think there is a difference between physician-patient relationship and dentist-patient relationship. Both have to abide by the laws of doctor-patient relationships. They both also have the responsibility to care for their patients to the best of their ability and what is in the best interest of the patient. So making the decision whether or not to pull Patrick’s teeth would be a hard decision. You want to please the patient, but you have to follow what is ethically right. In this instance if Patrick wants his teeth pulled and knows the consequences of it, I do not think that there is a problem in having the surgery. It is ultimately however the dentists decision whether or not he is comfortable doing it. The dentist could always reject Patrick, and Patrick could try to find a different dentist to do it.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question (1), there is no difference between the dentist-patient and physician-patient relationship considering both a dentist and a physician have the responsibility of consulting with the patient regarding the specified issue on or in the patient's body. Whether this body part is the brain or teeth, the manner in which the professional addresses the patient should be ethically the same, although the exact actions are obviously going to vary based on the situation. A dentist cares for the teeth and mouth, both of which are vital and necessary for a human to live a well and healthy life.
ReplyDeleteAs for question (2), Patrick M. has the right to request a root canal on each of his teeth and the endodontist is responsible to inform Patrick of the potential risks associated with the procedure. But, aware of the danger of the situation, the endodontist also has the right to refuse to perform the root canals based on his knowledge of the possible infection and damage to healthy tissue. If, after being denied by the first endodontist, Patrick is able to find another endodontist who is willing to perform the root canals, the procedure is then ethical. Just as Evan introduced above, cosmetic plastic surgery is not necessary and is still routinely conducted, even with the notable health risks. Patrick's request falls under the exact same category.
1. The dentist-patient relationship and physician patient relationship have no significant differences. They both are health professionals with doctorate degrees in a specific area. In each relationship, the health professional must consult the patient in order to do what is best for them in the particular situation. The health professional cannot perform a surgery or operation without consent. The patient must give the consent before the operation is completed.
ReplyDelete2. The endodontist should not accede to Patricks M's desires. Patrick M's blood vessels and nerves are not damaged or diseased, therefor they do not need the operation for survival. It would be unethical for the endodontist to perdorm the procedure on healthy tissue. Patrick M has no signs that he will ever have a problem with the tissue in his teeth. If the vessels or nerves become infected and cause Patrick M to experience pain, then he can return to the office to have a root canal done on his teeth.
1. I do not believe there is a difference between doctor patient relationship and dentist patient relationship. Dentists have the same role in a patients life as a physician does. The well being of the patient is in the hands of the dentist just the same as the patients well being is in the hands of a physician, just a different area of the patients well being. It is the responsibility of both the dentist and physician to make the decision to do what is best for the patient, and not do something that will cause problems for the patient later.
ReplyDelete2. I believe that the dentist should not accede to Patricks desires in this case. The desires of Patrick are unreasonable because there is no reason to believe that there will be anything wrong with his teeth or the government in the future. Even if Patrick believes it is best for him, the dentist, who has a greater amount of knowledge in the area, thinks it is unnecessary, as well as unethical and wrong. Therefore, the dentist should not perform the procedure because it is, in his own belief, unnecessary and unethical.
1. I do not think there is a difference between the doctor patient and dentist patient relationship. Both work in the healthcare system to provide care for the public. They both deal with the well being of the patient which is up to them to make the appropriate decision for the patient.
ReplyDelete2. I do not think the dentist should do the procedure. Dentists and doctors alike have to take the hypocratic oath which fist states do no harm. The procedure although routine still has risks of complications and infections. These risks are un-nessisary when it is not warranted thus going against the oath to do no harm.
Friendly and quick. For a person who hated going to the dentist I am not dreading my next cleaning!
ReplyDeletepainless root canal treatment in madipakkam
Thanks you very much for sharing these links. Will definitely check this out.. https://maindentalmi.com/
ReplyDelete