Nonmaleficence ethical principle11/16/2023 ![]() ![]() Nonetheless, the potential benefits of any intervention must outweigh the risks in order for the action to be ethical. Ultimately it is the patient who assigns weight to the risks and benefits. By providing informed consent, physicians give patients the information necessary to understand the scope and nature of the potential risks and benefits in order to make a decision. This balance is the one between the benefits and risks of treatment and plays a role in nearly every medical decision, such as whether to order a particular test, medication, procedure, operation, or treatment. One of the most common ethical dilemmas arises in the balancing of beneficence and nonmaleficence. In addition, physicians must not do anything that would purposely harm patients without the action being balanced by proportional benefit. Physicians should not provide ineffective treatments to patients as these offer risk with no possibility of benefit and thus have a chance of harming patients. The pertinent ethical issue is whether the benefits outweigh the burdens. This principle, however, offers little useful guidance to physicians since many beneficial therapies also have serious risks. Physicians must refrain from providing ineffective treatments or acting with malice toward patients. ![]() The principle of nonmaleficence directs physicians to “do no harm” to patients. ![]() A term in medical ethics that derives from the ancient maxim primum non nocere, which, translated from the Latin, means first, do no harm. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |