How I would answer: I think it would first be important to assess James' mental ability of accepting the devastating news about his terminal condition. It is crucial to understand how this may have an affect on his mental health and well-being. Whilst I do think its important to listen to parent considerations, I think if the child is curious about their condition they have a right to know. I can also look at this situation from the parent's eyes and see that they are only trying to protect James from the horrible information but it is inevitable that one day James will have to be told the seriousness of his condition. The last thing we would want is James to have some resentment towards his parents for asking doctors not to tell him, changing the family dynamic. I would definitely make it priority to have a discussion with the parents about the best move forward and hear out their concerns. From that meeting we would be able to make a decision on whether the best interests are to tell James or wait any longer to tell him. Personally, I'd feel it to be more helpful if in this situation we were honest about his condition but ultimately its a team effort between doctor and parents - their opinion cannot be ignored. About the refusal of treatment: I would come to this conversation with an open mind and firstly understand the reasons of which James is refusing the treatment. Being of such a young age it could be feasible that his is influenced with misinformation online about certain parts of his treatment. If the treatment is necessary and life-saving I would definitely discuss with James the problems of the stoppage of this treatment may bring him. I will be honest, open and sincere, leaving room for questions that James may wish to ask me. If possible we could discuss alternate treatment options that may be just as effective if he is really unwilling to undergo his treatment.
Does this scenario not relate directly to Gillick competence. Thus, the 3rd situation would have a clear conclusion essentially sticking to the point that refusal of treatment for minors in the UK is not afforded by Gillick Competence and the discontinuation would be up to the parents?
Hey, I thought Gillicks competence can be used when young people wish to refuse medical treatment. So can you elaborate on why refusal of treatment for minors in the UK is not afforded by Gillick competitence?
She repeats ''what is going on'' which i dont think is professional phrase to use in such situation. She did not relate to 4 pillars of ethics. During second scenario, she did not include taking into account James relapse, how bad it is, what are the chances for James to have normal life like other teenagers. In addition, depending on country, children under 16 years of age are still under law ( the UK) so that should be discussed or at least said to show that she has done some research. Definitely should make pauses between scenarios or repeat the scenario to make sure she understands it well and covers all aspects of it.
@@MedicMind It depends really, if this is NHS scotland then he is allowed to refuse life saving treatment, but if not then james doesnt have the right to refuse life saving treatment because because he is under 16 and therefore the parents decide, but if the doctor thinks its of the best interest then the doctor can go ahead with the treatment but they may be taken to court for doing so, but as long as u can justify ur decision then its okay
I am a little confused, I thought the parents made the final decision so you cannot inform the child about his condition but only encourage his parents that the best decision to make is to tell him.
Yea that’s what I was thinking. I don’t know if you can just tell him even if he has the interest and capacity. Parents probably have a reason for not telling him (most likely they don’t want him to worry)
@@noice4139 Yes and sometimes parents believe it will ruin the health of a child even more especially mentally, so this ethical scenario is a tricky one
No, but what he said that the doctor informed the parents that the patients is at sufficient capacity to understand why the procedure is being done and what is happening to him...to which his parents agree; however if they do not agree the doctor has no obligation to tell the patient of his diagnosis. (Due to his age)
If the child has capacity which basically means that they can understand, communicate, weigh up pros and cons, and retain the information; then it is completely fine to let them make decision for themselves. However, I think parents must also be informed about the decision thier child wants to make
Hi, I don't think you'll get a reply as this was old but u can research the GMC duties of a doctor (www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/good-medical-practice/duties-of-a-doctor), NHS constitutional values (www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/working-health/working-nhs/nhs-constitution) and finally just try to define and explain and try to put the following terms into any ethical question context: Autonomy Beneficence non-maleficence Justice Confidentiality capacity consent.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
i want to cry
I want to cry also.
same
i am crying
we do be crying here
real
How I would answer:
I think it would first be important to assess James' mental ability of accepting the devastating news about his terminal condition. It is crucial to understand how this may have an affect on his mental health and well-being. Whilst I do think its important to listen to parent considerations, I think if the child is curious about their condition they have a right to know.
I can also look at this situation from the parent's eyes and see that they are only trying to protect James from the horrible information but it is inevitable that one day James will have to be told the seriousness of his condition. The last thing we would want is James to have some resentment towards his parents for asking doctors not to tell him, changing the family dynamic.
I would definitely make it priority to have a discussion with the parents about the best move forward and hear out their concerns. From that meeting we would be able to make a decision on whether the best interests are to tell James or wait any longer to tell him. Personally, I'd feel it to be more helpful if in this situation we were honest about his condition but ultimately its a team effort between doctor and parents - their opinion cannot be ignored.
About the refusal of treatment:
I would come to this conversation with an open mind and firstly understand the reasons of which James is refusing the treatment. Being of such a young age it could be feasible that his is influenced with misinformation online about certain parts of his treatment.
If the treatment is necessary and life-saving I would definitely discuss with James the problems of the stoppage of this treatment may bring him. I will be honest, open and sincere, leaving room for questions that James may wish to ask me. If possible we could discuss alternate treatment options that may be just as effective if he is really unwilling to undergo his treatment.
Didn’t ask bro
@@alyasa7617 Note to myself, not you.
pretty good answer, you just have to put this into words and speak confidently which makes it lot harder
Excellent Response! 👏
@@idiotsandwich7420 Ended up getting two offers out of two interviews so I guess it worked!
Does this scenario not relate directly to Gillick competence. Thus, the 3rd situation would have a clear conclusion essentially sticking to the point that refusal of treatment for minors in the UK is not afforded by Gillick Competence and the discontinuation would be up to the parents?
Hey, I thought Gillicks competence can be used when young people wish to refuse medical treatment. So can you elaborate on why refusal of treatment for minors in the UK is not afforded by Gillick competitence?
She repeats ''what is going on'' which i dont think is professional phrase to use in such situation. She did not relate to 4 pillars of ethics. During second scenario, she did not include taking into account James relapse, how bad it is, what are the chances for James to have normal life like other teenagers. In addition, depending on country, children under 16 years of age are still under law ( the UK) so that should be discussed or at least said to show that she has done some research. Definitely should make pauses between scenarios or repeat the scenario to make sure she understands it well and covers all aspects of it.
This makes it look so easy...😅
what if james wanted to die, would he be allowed to refuse life saving treatment?
@rosewater apologies, that's correct his parents have the final say
@@MedicMind It depends really, if this is NHS scotland then he is allowed to refuse life saving treatment, but if not then james doesnt have the right to refuse life saving treatment because because he is under 16 and therefore the parents decide, but if the doctor thinks its of the best interest then the doctor can go ahead with the treatment but they may be taken to court for doing so, but as long as u can justify ur decision then its okay
@@MedicMind what if James parents want him to die???
@@BoxOfCurryos 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
hey, mmi, this doesnt help me with my car insurance after being blown up by xX_lIIllllIIIIll_Xx
I am a little confused, I thought the parents made the final decision so you cannot inform the child about his condition but only encourage his parents that the best decision to make is to tell him.
Yea that’s what I was thinking. I don’t know if you can just tell him even if he has the interest and capacity. Parents probably have a reason for not telling him (most likely they don’t want him to worry)
@@noice4139 Yes and sometimes parents believe it will ruin the health of a child even more especially mentally, so this ethical scenario is a tricky one
No, but what he said that the doctor informed the parents that the patients is at sufficient capacity to understand why the procedure is being done and what is happening to him...to which his parents agree; however if they do not agree the doctor has no obligation to tell the patient of his diagnosis. (Due to his age)
If the child has capacity which basically means that they can understand, communicate, weigh up pros and cons, and retain the information; then it is completely fine to let them make decision for themselves. However, I think parents must also be informed about the decision thier child wants to make
When you said it was clear that she did her research can u put the link to the guidelines and research that she understand?
Hi, I don't think you'll get a reply as this was old but u can research the GMC duties of a doctor (www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/good-medical-practice/duties-of-a-doctor), NHS constitutional values (www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/working-health/working-nhs/nhs-constitution) and finally just try to define and explain and try to put the following terms into any ethical question context:
Autonomy
Beneficence
non-maleficence
Justice
Confidentiality
capacity
consent.
This is really helpful :)
This is a model candidate right?
Yes that’s right !
Cruickshank Springs
Adams Circle
Mors Mutual Insurance
Johnston Springs
114 Tillman Falls
Destini Cove
Joanne Forest
Horace Forge
Nathaniel Falls
Parisian Glen
Satterfield Keys
Jazlyn Stravenue
Cremin Hollow
Kaelyn Locks
Goldner Throughway
Wuckert Prairie
Elenor Forge
Stark Crescent
Emmerich Lakes
Charlene Shoal
Tremaine Center
Wyman Fields
Chelsea Island
Christiansen Mission
Doug Brook
Christiana Hollow
Ceasar Knoll
Maye Lane
Toby Course
Hank Ferry
Reva Roads
Bins Grove
Tromp Skyway
Colleen Island
090 Eugenia Isle
Nader Road
Jast Place
Watsica Mall
Huel Port
Zieme Highway
Geovany Islands
Pacocha Points
Fae Mill
Kub Parks
Oleta Vista
Jude Plains
Hall Mary Jackson Jennifer White Patricia
Haag Union
Jones Brenda Hall Timothy Robinson Michael