Medical ethics

Medical Ethics al Affiliation) Case Study Janet’s advance health care directive about life prolongation if she were to end up in persistent vegetative state, with her parents as her secondary agents decision to transfer her to the hospice unit should not be considered now until legal assistance is provided so that medical ethics is upheld. Instead, Janet should be put on life support for now as mentioned in the statute that was referenced in a note found in her medical records.
A pregnant woman’s health care treatment declarations are of no effect while pregnant if she is within the State of Kansas, the State of Kansas statute is in one way or the other referenced and is qualified to be in a persistent vegetative state are underlying values of the statue mentioned.
As the statute entails protecting the fetus; hence, validating the attending physician’s decision to disqualify Janet’s declaration. As such, the advance health care directive in light is particularly tailored for a single party (the woman) and excluding any additional party which is the fetus, in this case.
Allowing the physician to place the patient on life-sustaining procedures before the legal matter is discussed and clarified would be a fit decision because it co-exists with the statute referenced in a note found in the patient’s medical record.
Janet’s fetus is obliged to a surrogate because the advance health directive about life prolongation excludes any other party if Janet’s vegetative state would have been persistent. Surrogacy to the fetus will allow Janet’s directives to be upheld as she wished without compromising medical ethics by not withdrawing life from the fetus as well.