The dentist-patient relationship, at its core, is no different from the physician-patient relationship. In both cases it is a health care professional-patient relationship. The relationship should be based upon trust and confidentiality. The only real difference is how a dentist can respond to a patient’s desires. Most physicians work within a practice/hospital owned by some organization/group/etc. Most dentists run their own private practice. Therefore, the dentist does not have to acquiesce to the patient’s request if it is not in their best interest and they do not feel the procedure would be safe/in the patient’s best interest. A physicians actions are finally dictated by what a patient demands their treatment be; ex. Keep me loved one alive on a ventilator despite them having no chance of recovering. In Case 4, I would expect many endodontists to refuse to provide this treatment. They could do so, because they do not have any direct bosses, they are running their own practice/business. The endodontist must ask themselves is the treatment needed (no), would it be beneficial to the patient (excluding an apocalypse, no), and could it be potentially harmful (yes, your teeth have nerves for a reason). Obviously the patient is not the in best state of mind, so to acquiesce the request of someone who is somewhat unstable is paramount to theft. You would be leaving them with a bill (depending on number of teeth, around $25,000 - $30,000) for a procedure that would have no benefit. You would be destroying the integrity and weakening the structure of healthy teeth for no reason, other than to calm the anxiety of a person obsessed with surviving an apocalypse. I’m afraid of breaking my leg, can you amputate it? That is about just as valid of an analogy of what the patient is asking the dentist. As a future dentist, I know I would discuss the issue with the patient, but if they continued to push for it, I would refuse to provide this procedure. Owning my own private practice, I wouldn’t have to give them a reason either.
I agree with almost all of the points that Mike has made on this analysis of the dentistry example. I especially agree that the operation should be avoided because it would be morally wrong to know that the requested procedure was unnecessary and extreme. It would be like stealing from the patient. However I do not know what I would say to the patient other than I am not able to perform that procedure. I would not feel comfortable telling the person that they needed help because it would not be my profession to diagnose something calling them crazy. I also would not want to hurt their feelings either. It is just kind of an odd situation, but in the long run you would be saving them a lot of money so denying them treatment would be the best way of going about it even if you have to hurt their feelings in the end.
Good point on the crazy thing Jimmy. I wasn't necessarily going to tell them they were crazy though and needed psychological help (although I would definitely think that if I actually had this case!). If faced with the situation I would probably just tell them I would not be comfortable doing an extreme procedure that is not in your best interest (like you said Jim).
I just want to get the last word in this mike, I was just wanting to clarify. I know that you are going into dentistry and wanted to make sure you wouldn't do anything like calling a patient crazy ... (just messing with you mike I know you wouldn't do that)
I totally agree with some of things you guys are saying. I totally agree this operation should be avoided. Its a completly unnecessary operation seeing as how his teeth and nerves are all working properly and are in fact all healthy. This procedure was made for people in pain who actually need it not someone like Patrick who has heatlhy teeth. It would be like taking something from patrick that isn't the endodontist. I don't know what the doctor would be able to say to the patient except that he can't do it seeing as there is no valid reason like pain or what not. This situation is a very odd one because in one hand it saves the patient pain and money down the road but it is unnecessary at the time. So what would one even do/ say to patrick?
I agree with you all, the operation at the moment is unnecessary so it should not be done. If Patrick were worrying about money in the future I would suggest that he ask the endodontist about a price and then create an account for this procedure whenever he needs it to be done.
I feel he does not need the operation at the moment since his teeth are in no need to be fix who would want to spend all of that extra money for a surgery that wont do anything. Refusing to treat the patient do to not being in the right state of mind is morally right. Saving his teeth from being possibly damaged during a meaningless surgery.
There is no difference between physician-patient, and dentist-patient relationship, it is just as important to see your regular physician as well as your dentist, they just have a bad rep for scrapping your teeth with a pick-axe. If the Dr feels that strongly about this, he can recommend (or demand) that he s=consult a psychiatrist before undergoing such a radical procedure. Ofcourse if he's right and society breaks down, a toothache will be the least of his worries.
I do not think there is much difference between a physician-patient relationship and a dentist-patient relationship. They are both dealing with patients and with the health issues that they might have. I think the one difference that is important in this situation is the amount of complications that come along with procedures (not always). This is not always the case but in some instances the patient is put more at risk on an operating table than in a dentist chair. I say this because if a patient wanted an organ removed to reduce the chances of him getting cancer or something, then I think that is absurd. The complications in that procedure put the patient way to at risk (obviously). When it comes to removing someone's teeth, I dont see much going wrong. People get teeth removed all the time bc they want perfect teeth. What is the difference in this situation. I understand that his reasoning is crazy and the dude is wack-job, but in the end its the same as someone with really jacked teeth coming in to get better teeth. There is a great example of this if you watch bayou billionaires lol, and he actually puts diamonds in his new teeth ha..... If the guys that much of a wack-job he probably doesn't brush his teeth anyway, so it actually might be a benefit for him in the long run.
I see your point but an endodontist doesn't remove teeth. They drill out the pulp of the tooth that contains all of the blood vessels and nerves. This ruins the structural integrity of the tooth and really all that remains is a hollow shell of a tooth. Having 28 or 32 large fillings or that many crowns has its own set of possible complications (both in the near and far future). Also in the Case they said he had healthy teeth so apparently he was taking good care of them.
well Burns, first I would like to say sorry for the late response. It only takes me around three weeks to respond =)....but I do see where your getting at with the added complications, I did not know the procedure (so thanks). I do think that in the end it is their choice to get their teeth removed for whatever reason. He might be really busy and doesnt have time brushing his teeth so he wants to get them removed (terrible argument lol)... Well done Mr. Denist Burns.... Btw is was hard to come up with an argument because im in class arguing with Dr. Sherron about plastic surgery.....
I as if the dentist-patient relationship is very similar to the physician-patient relationship, because they are both healthcare professionals serving the people to improve overall health. I feel that the endodontist should perform the procedures because the patient requests it; as long as laws aren't being broken and there aren't any serious moral objections at stake, then the procedure should be performed no matter how strange and bizarre it may be.
Do you think there are any moral problems with providing a procedure that will cost over $30,000 that is completely unwarranted and eccentric? Especially when it is based on the desires of a man who wants this done because he believes the world is ending. I know it would be nice to get that paycheck, but deep down you know it is a pointless procedure it almost seems like taking advantage of the fanatic beliefs of person.
I agree with what Mike has to say about this part of the study. I would feel very uncomfortable performing this operation on the patient even if he insists upon it. I do feel that it is morally wrong because in a way it is similar to stealing. You may be doing as the patient asks, but in the process getting a large chunk of money for the high cost procedure by taking advantage of the patient whom is clearly not in the right state of mind. Also I might add that the endodontist knows that the procedure is useless and as Mike stated above may cause a number of problems to occur. As I stated in my earlier post, I would probably handle the uncomfortable situation by simply telling the patient that I did not feel comfortable enough providing that procedure for the patient and that he would need to find a new endodontist.
I also agree with Mike in this situation. I think that performing the procedure would be taking advantage of a man who is probably not of sound mind for a nice paycheck. It is completely unnecessary and could eventually cause more harm than good. Although it is what the patient requests, the endodontist has every right to refuse the patient if he/she is not comfortable with the procedure. If the patient really wants it done then he will probably find another endodontist who would be more comfortable with the procedure.
I don't think that there is any difference between a dentist-patient relationship and the physician-patient because they are both medical doctors as Antonio stated. They both have the same obligations to take care of their patients. I think that the endodontist should not perform the surgery because there is no reason to perform it. Even though that the patient wants the procedure done, the doctor has a moral obligation to help and benefit his or her patients and not put them through more pain for any reason.
There is no difference in the relationships. They both go to intense professional schools and they are enhanced medically, though dentists focus on one area whereas physicians focus on others. However, they both respect personal health information and treat you as a patient. This situation is tricky. In the last case (case 3) I feel that the procedure was also not needed, yet the patient should have the right to have the procedure because it was his wish. Now in this case, the procedure is still not needed, so my same values would say that he should be able to have this operation done. While I see the logic behind having case 3 done, this case truly seems like it is not needed but if it is the patient's wish, then they should be able to have it done.
There is no significant difference between the dentist-patient relationships and the physician-patient relationships, because they both are working together in the same goal, which is to better the patients life. I definitely believe that the endodontist should accede to Patrick’s desires. Unlike the other case where the operation could have huge implications on the patient’s life, this procedure is going to ensure that Patrick will never suffer a toothache. Again as long as Patrick understands the any problems he may eventually face with the procedure, it is not the endodontists job to make his decisions for him.
The physician-patient relationship is where healing, agreements, and support are accomplished and provided. It is a relationship based on trust that allows the patient to fully commit and open up to the physician. There are no significant differences between the dentist-patient relationship and the physician-patient relationship. A dentist and a physician are both doctors that are trained to take care of people for different reasons. They complete different types of surgery, gain the trust of their patients, and make their decisions based on ethical grounds. According to Kant, the endodontist has the imperfect duty to others to prevent harm from befalling them, but he also has the perfect duty to not lie and the endodontist would be lying to Patrick if he said he could not perform the surgery because it is possible. Based on the principle of bioethics the endodontist should perform the surgery because out of the four principles, only the principle of nonmaleficence (he cannot harm patient) would prevent him from doing so. Based on the Kantian principle and the principle of bioethics the endodontist can ethically perform this surgery in agreement with Patrick's beliefs. As long as he fills out the necessary paper work and is fully informed of anything that can happen during or after the surgery.
The dentist-patient relationship, at its core, is no different from the physician-patient relationship. In both cases it is a health care professional-patient relationship. The relationship should be based upon trust and confidentiality. The only real difference is how a dentist can respond to a patient’s desires. Most physicians work within a practice/hospital owned by some organization/group/etc. Most dentists run their own private practice. Therefore, the dentist does not have to acquiesce to the patient’s request if it is not in their best interest and they do not feel the procedure would be safe/in the patient’s best interest. A physicians actions are finally dictated by what a patient demands their treatment be; ex. Keep me loved one alive on a ventilator despite them having no chance of recovering.
ReplyDeleteIn Case 4, I would expect many endodontists to refuse to provide this treatment. They could do so, because they do not have any direct bosses, they are running their own practice/business. The endodontist must ask themselves is the treatment needed (no), would it be beneficial to the patient (excluding an apocalypse, no), and could it be potentially harmful (yes, your teeth have nerves for a reason). Obviously the patient is not the in best state of mind, so to acquiesce the request of someone who is somewhat unstable is paramount to theft. You would be leaving them with a bill (depending on number of teeth, around $25,000 - $30,000) for a procedure that would have no benefit. You would be destroying the integrity and weakening the structure of healthy teeth for no reason, other than to calm the anxiety of a person obsessed with surviving an apocalypse. I’m afraid of breaking my leg, can you amputate it? That is about just as valid of an analogy of what the patient is asking the dentist. As a future dentist, I know I would discuss the issue with the patient, but if they continued to push for it, I would refuse to provide this procedure. Owning my own private practice, I wouldn’t have to give them a reason either.
I agree with almost all of the points that Mike has made on this analysis of the dentistry example. I especially agree that the operation should be avoided because it would be morally wrong to know that the requested procedure was unnecessary and extreme. It would be like stealing from the patient. However I do not know what I would say to the patient other than I am not able to perform that procedure. I would not feel comfortable telling the person that they needed help because it would not be my profession to diagnose something calling them crazy. I also would not want to hurt their feelings either. It is just kind of an odd situation, but in the long run you would be saving them a lot of money so denying them treatment would be the best way of going about it even if you have to hurt their feelings in the end.
ReplyDeleteGood point on the crazy thing Jimmy. I wasn't necessarily going to tell them they were crazy though and needed psychological help (although I would definitely think that if I actually had this case!). If faced with the situation I would probably just tell them I would not be comfortable doing an extreme procedure that is not in your best interest (like you said Jim).
ReplyDeleteI just want to get the last word in this mike, I was just wanting to clarify. I know that you are going into dentistry and wanted to make sure you wouldn't do anything like calling a patient crazy ... (just messing with you mike I know you wouldn't do that)
DeleteI totally agree with some of things you guys are saying. I totally agree this operation should be avoided. Its a completly unnecessary operation seeing as how his teeth and nerves are all working properly and are in fact all healthy. This procedure was made for people in pain who actually need it not someone like Patrick who has heatlhy teeth. It would be like taking something from patrick that isn't the endodontist. I don't know what the doctor would be able to say to the patient except that he can't do it seeing as there is no valid reason like pain or what not. This situation is a very odd one because in one hand it saves the patient pain and money down the road but it is unnecessary at the time. So what would one even do/ say to patrick?
ReplyDeleteI agree with you all, the operation at the moment is unnecessary so it should not be done. If Patrick were worrying about money in the future I would suggest that he ask the endodontist about a price and then create an account for this procedure whenever he needs it to be done.
ReplyDeleteI feel he does not need the operation at the moment since his teeth are in no need to be fix who would want to spend all of that extra money for a surgery that wont do anything. Refusing to treat the patient do to not being in the right state of mind is morally right. Saving his teeth from being possibly damaged during a meaningless surgery.
ReplyDeleteThere is no difference between physician-patient, and dentist-patient relationship, it is just as important to see your regular physician as well as your dentist, they just have a bad rep for scrapping your teeth with a pick-axe. If the Dr feels that strongly about this, he can recommend (or demand) that he s=consult a psychiatrist before undergoing such a radical procedure. Ofcourse if he's right and society breaks down, a toothache will be the least of his worries.
ReplyDeleteI do not think there is much difference between a physician-patient relationship and a dentist-patient relationship. They are both dealing with patients and with the health issues that they might have. I think the one difference that is important in this situation is the amount of complications that come along with procedures (not always). This is not always the case but in some instances the patient is put more at risk on an operating table than in a dentist chair. I say this because if a patient wanted an organ removed to reduce the chances of him getting cancer or something, then I think that is absurd. The complications in that procedure put the patient way to at risk (obviously). When it comes to removing someone's teeth, I dont see much going wrong. People get teeth removed all the time bc they want perfect teeth. What is the difference in this situation. I understand that his reasoning is crazy and the dude is wack-job, but in the end its the same as someone with really jacked teeth coming in to get better teeth. There is a great example of this if you watch bayou billionaires lol, and he actually puts diamonds in his new teeth ha..... If the guys that much of a wack-job he probably doesn't brush his teeth anyway, so it actually might be a benefit for him in the long run.
ReplyDeleteI see your point but an endodontist doesn't remove teeth. They drill out the pulp of the tooth that contains all of the blood vessels and nerves. This ruins the structural integrity of the tooth and really all that remains is a hollow shell of a tooth. Having 28 or 32 large fillings or that many crowns has its own set of possible complications (both in the near and far future). Also in the Case they said he had healthy teeth so apparently he was taking good care of them.
Deletewell Burns, first I would like to say sorry for the late response. It only takes me around three weeks to respond =)....but I do see where your getting at with the added complications, I did not know the procedure (so thanks). I do think that in the end it is their choice to get their teeth removed for whatever reason. He might be really busy and doesnt have time brushing his teeth so he wants to get them removed (terrible argument lol)... Well done Mr. Denist Burns.... Btw is was hard to come up with an argument because im in class arguing with Dr. Sherron about plastic surgery.....
DeleteI as if the dentist-patient relationship is very similar to the physician-patient relationship, because they are both healthcare professionals serving the people to improve overall health. I feel that the endodontist should perform the procedures because the patient requests it; as long as laws aren't being broken and there aren't any serious moral objections at stake, then the procedure should be performed no matter how strange and bizarre it may be.
ReplyDeleteDo you think there are any moral problems with providing a procedure that will cost over $30,000 that is completely unwarranted and eccentric? Especially when it is based on the desires of a man who wants this done because he believes the world is ending. I know it would be nice to get that paycheck, but deep down you know it is a pointless procedure it almost seems like taking advantage of the fanatic beliefs of person.
DeleteI agree with what Mike has to say about this part of the study. I would feel very uncomfortable performing this operation on the patient even if he insists upon it. I do feel that it is morally wrong because in a way it is similar to stealing. You may be doing as the patient asks, but in the process getting a large chunk of money for the high cost procedure by taking advantage of the patient whom is clearly not in the right state of mind. Also I might add that the endodontist knows that the procedure is useless and as Mike stated above may cause a number of problems to occur. As I stated in my earlier post, I would probably handle the uncomfortable situation by simply telling the patient that I did not feel comfortable enough providing that procedure for the patient and that he would need to find a new endodontist.
DeleteI also agree with Mike in this situation. I think that performing the procedure would be taking advantage of a man who is probably not of sound mind for a nice paycheck. It is completely unnecessary and could eventually cause more harm than good. Although it is what the patient requests, the endodontist has every right to refuse the patient if he/she is not comfortable with the procedure. If the patient really wants it done then he will probably find another endodontist who would be more comfortable with the procedure.
DeleteI don't think that there is any difference between a dentist-patient relationship and the physician-patient because they are both medical doctors as Antonio stated. They both have the same obligations to take care of their patients. I think that the endodontist should not perform the surgery because there is no reason to perform it. Even though that the patient wants the procedure done, the doctor has a moral obligation to help and benefit his or her patients and not put them through more pain for any reason.
ReplyDeleteThere is no difference in the relationships. They both go to intense professional schools and they are enhanced medically, though dentists focus on one area whereas physicians focus on others. However, they both respect personal health information and treat you as a patient. This situation is tricky. In the last case (case 3) I feel that the procedure was also not needed, yet the patient should have the right to have the procedure because it was his wish. Now in this case, the procedure is still not needed, so my same values would say that he should be able to have this operation done. While I see the logic behind having case 3 done, this case truly seems like it is not needed but if it is the patient's wish, then they should be able to have it done.
ReplyDeleteThere is no significant difference between the dentist-patient relationships and the physician-patient relationships, because they both are working together in the same goal, which is to better the patients life. I definitely believe that the endodontist should accede to Patrick’s desires. Unlike the other case where the operation could have huge implications on the patient’s life, this procedure is going to ensure that Patrick will never suffer a toothache. Again as long as Patrick understands the any problems he may eventually face with the procedure, it is not the endodontists job to make his decisions for him.
ReplyDeleteThe physician-patient relationship is where healing, agreements, and support are accomplished and provided. It is a relationship based on trust that allows the patient to fully commit and open up to the physician. There are no significant differences between the dentist-patient relationship and the physician-patient relationship. A dentist and a physician are both doctors that are trained to take care of people for different reasons. They complete different types of surgery, gain the trust of their patients, and make their decisions based on ethical grounds. According to Kant, the endodontist has the imperfect duty to others to prevent harm from befalling them, but he also has the perfect duty to not lie and the endodontist would be lying to Patrick if he said he could not perform the surgery because it is possible. Based on the principle of bioethics the endodontist should perform the surgery because out of the four principles, only the principle of nonmaleficence (he cannot harm patient) would prevent him from doing so. Based on the Kantian principle and the principle of bioethics the endodontist can ethically perform this surgery in agreement with Patrick's beliefs. As long as he fills out the necessary paper work and is fully informed of anything that can happen during or after the surgery.
ReplyDelete