NHS Medical Ethics Quiz

Q1 21% of people agreed with your decision.
Q2 49% of people agreed with your decision.
Q3 40% of people agreed with your decision.
Q4 59% of people agreed with your decision.
Q5 8% of people agreed with your decision.
Q6 62% of people agreed with your decision.

You agreed with the NHS the majority of the time.
 
agreed most of the time with nhs.
imo
patient has the ultimate right if mentally sound and should be allowed to refuse treatment.
baby/child, doctors should have precedence over the parents unless the kid is deemed to understand, then the kids wishes should be the one.
Nhs needs to focus more on preemptive treatment rather than reactive.
 
Agreed with NHS most of the time.

I think patients should have the right to decide their own fate if they are of sound mind. Also, parents should be allowed to seek different treatments for their children abroad as long as those treatments have been proven to work.
 
I agree with the NHS most of the time apparently. Although it seems somewhat simplistic in terms of questions.
 
I'm fairly anti-establishment, so I answered against in most questions:

Q1 - I agreed with Hannah (79%)
Q2 - I agreed with the couple (49%)
Q3 - I agreed with the NHS (60%)
Q4 - I agreed with the National AIDS Trust (41%)
Q5 - I agreed with Ms B (92%)
Q6 - I agreed with the parents (62%)

End result - the quiz said that I'm neutral in my ethical decision making.
 
An interesting quiz, but too complex to be covered in one small paragraph each.

Mrs B, for example. I agreed that she should be allowed to choose to die. But that's not the same thing as a member of staff at the hospital being forced to cause her death and those were the only two options presented. As long as someone else caused her death, someone who agreed to do it, I'd be OK with that decision. Preferably one of the judges who made the decision - if that was their decision and they have the power to force their decision to be implemented then it's their responsibility to implement it.

Other examples included the issue of cost. It's never as simple as "fund this or don't fund this" because it's always a matter of "if this is funded, something else won't be". So, for example, what treatment will be denied if the NHS has to spend £400 per person per month for an unknown number of years on a drug that only reduces the chance of HIV infection? I think that's an important factor in the decision, but it wasn't covered at all in the question.
 
^ on the 400 a month one.. I thought as you did so voted with the NHS

I find it terrible that just because someone can't move they can't end their life. Glad to see that that question was by far the most dramatic in its split. 92pc
 
q1- 79%
q2- 49%
q3- 60%
q4- 59% although it's mainly because there are cheaper ways of preventing such things
q5- 92%
q6- 38%

mostly i followed the logic that people should be free to make decisions about their own treatment, with the exception that parents do not have the exclusive right to control their child's treatment.

the assisted dying is a tricky issue, but in the particular case listed the fact she had written a living will whilst she still could indicated that she was accepting that this was something that could happen to her and had prepared for it. although angilion makes a good point that having someone who is legally permitted and personally prepared to do the actual deed of "pulling the plug", could certainly help on the moral load of the NHS.
 
Tosno said:
You agreed with the NHS the majority of the time.
Click to expand...

There's a surprise... someone with some much empathy and compassion as yourself... ;)


As for me:

Q1 - 79%
Q2 - 49%
Q3 - 60%
Q4 - 59%
Q5 - 92%
Q6 - 62%

So a mixture of NHS and non NHS options. Interestingly the ones I disagreed with NHS has a better outcome. But this sort of thing is good, it challenges the status quo, challenges the rules - only by doing so can we make improvements. Blindly following rules all the time doesn't allow us to grow as a society, but at the same time, one shouldn't aggressively go against the rules, but push on the boundaries to allow a little bit of stress testing.
 
adolf hamster said:
although angilion makes a good point that having someone who is legally permitted and personally prepared to do the actual deed of "pulling the plug", could certainly help on the moral load of the NHS.
Click to expand...

New official NHS role...

Job Description...

"Angel of Death" :p

In all seriousness, in "Most" cases I expect that the situation is handled the way it was for us when my Father died.

The Family was left alone in the hospital room and it was left to us to decide when to switch off the machinery and to actually do the deed :/
 
Q1 - Wasting time and money just picking and choosing when to have the op
Q2 - Not having kids is not going to kill you
Q3 - Court of law wielding power with no medical education
Q4 - NHS following their understanding of the rules get screwed over by the courts again
Q5 - She had written a will in sound mind it should have been add eared to - I can understand nobody wanting to take responsibility but there should be a plan in place for that.
Q6 - It does not mention how old the son was does it?
 
If you are an adult, sound of mind and have all the required information you have the right to make your own decisions, even if those are bad decisions.
 
Agreed with right to end one's life. Even agreed with the thirteen year old being allowed to decide for herself. The one that surprised me was the AIDS drug question. I'm very surprised that so many support paying £400 per month for gay men to have sex and which has a only 86% chance of prevention and can only encourage unsafe sex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom