buy custom The Under Dosing of Pain Medication essay

buy custom The Under Dosing of Pain Medication essay This paper examines the ethical issues surrounding hospice patients and under dosing their pain medication. Ethical considerations that relate to the problem of under dosing of pain medication in hospice care include autonomy, justice, beneficence and non-maleficence. Non-ethical consideration that relate to the problem of under dosing of pain medication in hospice care is legal issues. According to utilitarian thinking, rules about morals should make many people happy (Lo, 2009). Lo (2009) states, deontological thinking operates under the principle of moral law and common sense. The decision about pain medication is for the patient because he is the one experiencing the discomfort thus he should decide whether he want the pain medication. Health care professionals and availability of medications are institutional factors that affect decisions and course of actions (Guido, 2009). In conclusion, ethical issues surrounding hospice patients and under dosing their pain medication require a thorough review because many health care professionals are not familiar with the ethical considerations in case of a dilemma. Ethical considerations require equilibrium between care and the patient desire. In the provision of hospice care, most of the health care professionals usually neglect the patient needs and follow their own or the family desire. The patient is left in unbearable pain. The purpose of this paper is to identify the ethical issues surrounding hospice patients and under dosing their pain medication. Problem Identification Ethical considerations that relate to the problem of under dosing of pain medication in hospice care include autonomy, justice, beneficence and non-maleficence. Guido (2009) states, autonomy recognize the ability of a patient to make decision about his care depending on his values as well as beliefs. The patient can refuse a pain medication because of his beliefs. The principle of beneficence states that health care professionals should provide care that benefit the patient and protect him from harm (Snyder Gauthire, 2008). For instance, the nurse should effectively manage the patients pain by using the right dose of analgesics. According to non-maleficence, the health care professional should not inflict harm to the patient (Guido, 2009). The nurse should avoid giving the wrong medication for pain relief. Finally, justice is fair provision of care ( Lo, 2009). Health care professionals should mange patients according to the medical and legal requirements. Autonomy is the priority e thical consideration. The health care professionalsshould respect the autonomy of the patient by telling him the truth about the objective of care, outcome and options (Snyder Gauthire, 2008). Non-ethical consideration that relate to the problem of under dosing of pain medication in hospice care is legal issues. The law states that every person has freedom of choice (Guido, 2009) thus; a patient can refuse pain management therapy. The relationship between ethical and non-ethical consideration is their ability to affect the quality of care. For instance, a nurse may not do well to the patient if the patient refuses treatment. Considerations of Possible Actions According to utilitarian thinking, rules about morals should make many people happy (Lo, 2009). The health care professional should make a decision that make the family members and significant others happy even if it harm the patient. The viable actions are that the doctor can refuse to prescribe a pain medication that the patient request if the family members do not want it because of their beliefs or the patient can be forced to take a medication that he does not want because other people believe it beneficial. The consequences of utilitarian thinking can be negative or positive depending on the majority wishes and happiness (Snyder Gauthire, 2008). In a case the patient is denied the pain medication because family members are against it, he will experience discomfort while if given the right medication because many health care professionals are for it, he will be happy. Lo (2009) states, deontological thinking operates under the principle of moral law and common sense. In deontological ethics, a conflict usually occurs between autonomy and beneficence as well as non-maleficence (Guido, 2009). For instance, a nurse can be in a conflict when a patient refuses the full dose of pain medication. The duty of the nurse is to respect the patients autonomy, do that which benefit the patient and avoid harm. In this situation, the duty of respecting the patients autonomy is in conflict with the provision of beneficial care. The nurse should give the patient the right dose of pain medication and disrespect his autonomy. This is because beneficence will produce the greatest balance of rightness over wrongness compared to autonomy. Decision and Selection of Course of Action The decision about pain medication is for the patient because he is the one experiencing the discomfort thus he should decide whether he want the pain medication. According to Lo (2009), the ppatient has a right of deciding the kind of management that he wants. Although the patient has a right to make decision, some values and biasness can interfere with his choice. They include mental, physical and economic factors (Snyder Gauthire, 2008). A mentally disturbed patient cannot make a right choice. A patient who is in severe pain is likely to make a rational decision. Finally, a patient can choose a certain kind of medication because of the affordability and not potency. Health care professionals and availability of medications are institutional factors that affect decisions and course of actions (Guido, 2009). A doctor can prescribe a certain analgesic but if it is unavailable, then the patient has to take a different kind of pain medication. The right of a patient to refuse treatment is a legal factor that affects decision (Snyder Gauthire, 2008). If a patient does not want a certain medication, the nurse cannot force him. Social factors that affect decision are the culture, beliefs and religion (Guido, 2009). For example, some people believe that narcotics are not good. The decision being made is utilitarian thinking. The doctor implements this decision by selecting a course of action that makes the family members happy. The doctor reduces the dose of pain medication because the family members requested yet the patient is in severe pain. The aforementioned decision is not morally justified. The doctor and the family members should respect the patients request for the above decision to be justified because it is unfair to reduce the analgesics yet the patient is in severe pain. The decision made was against ANA Interpretive Statement Code for Nurses. According to the code, the nurse should respect the patients dignity and integrity (Guido, 2009). Reflection on Decision The selected decision was acted upon and it accomplished its purpose of making the relatives and the doctor happy. I believe that the decision made was not morally upright. This is because it did not respect the patients autonomy. In my opinion, deontological thinking could be the best theory because it respects the patients autonomy if the resulting action is beneficial. Conclusion Ethical issues surrounding hospice patients and under dosing their pain medication require a thorough review. Many health care professionals are not familiar with the ethical considerations in case of a dilemma. They should be educated on what to do when the patients life is at risk. Buy custom The Under Dosing of Pain Medication essay

The Gods of the Olmec

The Gods of the Olmec The mysterious Olmec Civilization flourished between roughly 1200 and 400 B.C. on Mexicos Gulf coast. Although there are still more mysteries than answers about this ancient culture, modern researchers have determined that religion was of great importance to the Olmec. Several supernatural beings appear and re-appear in the few examples of Olmec art that survive today. This has led archaeologists and ethnographers to tentatively identify a handful of Olmec gods. The Olmec Culture The Olmec culture was the first major Mesoamerican civilization, thriving in the steamy lowlands of Mexicos Gulf coast, mainly in the modern-day states of Tabasco and Veracruz. Their first major city, San Lorenzo (its original name has been lost to time) peaked around 1000 B.C. and was in serious decline by 900 B.C. The Olmec civilization had faded by 400 B.C.: no one is certain why. Later cultures, like the Aztec and the Maya, were heavily influenced by the Olmec. Today little survives of this grand civilization, but they left behind a rich artistic legacy including their majestic carved colossal heads. Olmec Religion Researchers have done a remarkable job of learning so much about Olmec religion and society. Archaeologist Richard Diehl has identified five elements of Olmec religion: a particular cosmos, a set of gods who interacted with mortals, a shaman class, specific rituals and sacred sites. Many specifics of these elements remain a mystery: for example, it is believed, but not proven, that one religious rite mimicked the transformation of a shaman into a were-jaguar. Complex A at La Venta is an Olmec ceremonial site which was largely preserved; much about Olmec religion was learned there. Olmec Gods The Olmec apparently had gods, or at least powerful supernatural beings, which were worshiped or respected in some way. Their names and functions - other than in the most general sense - have been lost over the ages. Olmec deities are represented in surviving stone carvings, cave paintings, and pottery. In most Mesoamerican art, gods are depicted as human-like  but are often more gruesome or imposing. Archaeologist Peter Joralemon, who has studied the Olmec extensively, has come up with a tentative identification of eight gods. These gods show a complicated mixture of human, bird, reptile and feline attributes. They include the Olmec Dragon, the Bird Monster, the Fish Monster, the Banded-eye God, the Maize God, the Water God, the Were-Jaguar and the Feathered Serpent. The Dragon, Bird Monster, and Fish Monster, when taken together, form the Olmec physical universe. The dragon represents the earth, the bird monster the skies and the fish monster the underworld. The Olmec Dragon The Olmec Dragon is depicted as a crocodile-like being, occasionally having human, eagle or jaguar features. His mouth, sometimes open in ancient carved images, is seen as a cave: perhaps, for this reason, the Olmec were fond of cave painting. The Olmec Dragon represented the Earth or at least the plane upon which humans lived. As such, he represented agriculture, fertility, fire and otherworldly things. The dragon may have been associated with the Olmec ruling classes or elite. This ancient creature may be the forebear of Aztec gods such as Cipactli, a crocodile god, or Xiuhtecuhtli, a fire god. The Bird Monster The Bird Monster represented the skies, sun, rulership, and agriculture. It is depicted as a fearsome bird, sometimes with reptilian features. The bird monster may have been the preferred god of the ruling class: carved likenesses of rulers sometimes are shown with bird monster symbols in their dress. The city once located at the La Venta archaeological site venerated the Bird Monster: its image appears there frequently, including on an important altar. The Fish Monster Also called the Shark Monster, the Fish Monster is thought to represent the underworld and appears as a frightening shark or fish with sharks teeth. Depictions of the Fish Monster have appeared in stone carvings, pottery, and small greenstone celts, but the most famous is on San Lorenzo Monument 58. On this massive stone carving, the Fish Monster appears with a fearsome mouth full of teeth, a large X on its back and a forked tail. Shark teeth excavated at San Lorenzo and La Venta suggest that the Fish Monster was honored in certain rituals. The Banded-Eye God Little is known about the mysterious Banded-eye God. Its name is a reflection of its appearance. It always appears in profile, with an almond shaped eye. A band or stripe passes behind or through the eye. The Banded-eye God appears more human than many of the other Olmec gods. It is found occasionally on pottery, but a good image appears on a famous Olmec statue, Las Limas Monument 1. The Maize God Because maize was such an important staple of life of the Olmec, its not surprising that they dedicated a god to its production. The Maize God appears as a human-ish figure with a stalk of corn growing out of his head. Like the Bird Monster, Maize God symbolism frequently appears on depictions of rulers. This could reflect the rulers responsibility to ensure bountiful crops for the people. The Water God The Water God often formed a divine team of sorts with the Maize God: the two are often associated with one another. The Olmec Water God appears as a chubby dwarf or infant with a gruesome face reminiscent of the Were-Jaguar. The Water Gods domain was likely not only water in general but also rivers, lakes and other water sources. The Water God appears on different forms of Olmec art, including large sculptures and smaller figurines and celts. It is possible that he is a forebear of later Mesoamerican water gods such as Chac and Tlaloc. The Were-Jaguar The Olmec were-jaguar is a most intriguing god. It appears as a human baby or infant with distinctly feline features, such as fangs, almond-shaped eyes and a cleft in his head. In some depictions, the were-jaguar baby is limp, as if it is dead or sleeping. Matthew W. Stirling proposed that the were-jaguar is the result of relations between a jaguar and a human female, but this theory is not universally accepted. The Feathered Serpent The Feathered Serpent is shown as a rattlesnake, either coiled or slithering, with feathers on its head. One excellent example is Monument 19 from La Venta. The feathered serpent is not very common in surviving Olmec art. Later incarnations such as Quetzalcoatl among the Aztecs or Kukulkan among the Maya seemingly had a much more important place in religion and daily life. Nevertheless, this common ancestor of the significant feathered serpents to come in Mesoamerican religion is considered important by researchers. Importance of the Olmec Gods The Olmec Gods are very important from an anthropological or cultural point of view and understanding them is critical to understanding Olmec civilization. The Olmec civilization, in turn, was the first major Mesoamerican culture and all of the later ones, such as the Aztec and Maya, borrowed heavily from these forebears. This is particularly visible in their pantheon. Most of the Olmec gods would evolve into major deities for later civilizations. The Feathered Serpent, for example, appears to have been a minor god to the Olmec, but it would rise to prominence in Aztec and Maya society. Research continues on the Olmec relics still in existence and at archaeological sites. Currently, there are still more questions than answers about the Olmec Gods: hopefully, future studies will illuminate their personalities even further. Sources: Coe, Michael D and Rex Koontz. Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs. 6th Edition. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2008 Diehl, Richard A. The Olmecs: Americas First Civilization. London: Thames and Hudson, 2004. Grove, David C. Cerros Sagradas Olmecas. Trans. Elisa Ramirez. Arqueologà ­a Mexicana Vol XV - Num. 87 (Sept-Oct 2007). P. 30-35. Miller, Mary and Karl Taube. An Illustrated Dictionary of the Gods and Symbols of Ancient Mexico and the Maya. New York: Thames Hudson, 1993.