Clinical ethics is a discipline or methodology for examining the ethical implications of medical technologies, policies, and treatments, with particular attention to determining what should (or should not be done) in the delivery of health care (Brock and Mastroianni, 2013). Codes of ethics are broad and should not be used as a model for ethical decisions. They are intended to recall the standards of conduct: that the nurse is required to maintain confidentiality, maintain competence, and protect patients from unethical practices (Lyons, 2011). Similarly, it is often impossible to obtain informed consent for research of the type discussed during the case study workshop session. In survey-based social science research, IRBs may waive consent requirements if they determine that three conditions are met: (1) the risk to subjects is minimal, (2) the use of the information for research purposes will not infringe on the rights and well-being of subjects, and (3) it would not be possible to have any other ethical and legal meaning, although they both aim to ensure that people live well. Ethical means carrying the value of distinguishing between good and bad behavior, while legal means acting in accordance with the law. Florence Nightingale spoke of non-malevolence more than 150 years ago when she reminded us that “the very first requirement in a hospital is that it should not cause harm to patients” – and went on to put in place systems and practices that are still used today to improve the quality and safety of patient care (Hughes, 2008). Ethical and Legal Norms: What`s the Difference? Making both ethical and legal decisions is something that investment professionals around the world are constantly paying attention to. Such decisions result from knowledge of the legal system, consideration of the interests of all parties and one`s own professional judgment. Nevertheless, there are situations in which possible actions violate either professional ethics or the law.
In this article, we will look at the differences between the two and guide decision-making in such scenarios. These conflicts are among the most discouraging circumstances faced by social workers. Compliance with legal expectations and requirements may conflict with social workers` understanding of ethical standards in social work, and adherence to ethical standards may result in violations of the law. In a situation of moral uncertainty, the professional is not sure that an ethical problem exists, or realizes that there is such a problem, but is aware of ethical principles. A moral dilemma can arise when the expert has to choose between two or more morally correct principles, each of which would lead to a specific course of action (Falcó-Pegueroles et al., 2013). [18] Under various legal provisions, including constitutional, legislative and customary law, the responsibilities of government counsel may include the power to deal with legal matters normally vested in the client in private relations between clients and lawyers. For example, a lawyer for a government agency may have the power, on behalf of the government, to decide on a settlement or to appeal an adverse judgment. In various ways, this authority generally rests with the Attorney General and The State Attorney of the state of the state government and their federal counterparts, and it may be the same for other government officials. Lawyers under the supervision of these officials may also be entitled to represent multiple government agencies in domestic disputes if a private lawyer cannot represent multiple private clients. These rules do not abolish that power. The Affordable Care Act also touches on the ethical principles of charity (kindness) and non-malice (do no harm) by establishing affordable exchanges and health care plans.
Exchange is an integral part of the complex problem that arises when health care is prescribed. It is based on the concept that requiring health insurance without having to deal with affordability would cause significant harm to individuals and families in financial difficulty (Lachman, 2012). Ethical standards, on the other hand, do not necessarily have a legal basis. They are based on the human principles of good and evil. For example, if you are trying to park your car in a parking lot and there is only one parking space left, the only legal standard you must follow is not to exceed the speed limit or collide with another car. Well, when you see another car about to go to that place, ethical standards tell you not to fight for the place, but to give room to the car that was there first. It is the right thing to do. This is an ethical standard.
Imagine being the one who was about to go to town and someone would pass by quickly and park there. You would feel treated unfairly, and yes, you have been wronged, ethically speaking. Because of their common focus on good and evil, the prevention of immoral behavior and the formulation of standards for specialized professions such as doctors and social workers, ethics and law are inextricably linked. Nevertheless, ethics and law are different areas, and a person`s ethical responsibility often outweighs their legal responsibilities. Moral conscience is a precursor to the development of legal rules for the social order. The equitable allocation of resources is an increasing challenge as technology improves and life is extended by natural and mechanical means. All of these factors place greater emphasis on an already inefficient and overburdened health system, leading to more difficult ethical decisions regarding the allocation of staff and the equitable distribution of financial resources. Respect for autonomy requires that patients be informed of the truth about their condition and the risks and benefits of treatment. Under the law, adult patients are allowed to refuse treatment, even if the best and most reliable information suggests that treatment would be beneficial, unless their action could harm the well-being of another person.
These conflicts can open the door to ethical dilemmas. Another similarity is that legal and ethical standards are there to help society as a whole. Legal standards are there to allow authorities to punish offenders so that people have some kind of security. Ethical standards exist for the same reason. Both are there to help people feel safe and prevent people from being hurt by others. Another difference is that legal norms are written by government leaders, while ethical norms are written by social norms. For example, in the United States, the social norm is to stand in line. A person would violate an ethical standard by cutting in the line. However, this is not the case in another country.
The social norm in this country could be that whoever is able to reach the door first can walk through the door first. In such a society, it is perfectly ethical to stand in line to reach the door first. Over the years, the MRSC has received many questions about whether certain actions are legal or ethical – and the way the questions are asked shows that there is often confusion about the use of the words “legal” and “ethical.” The distinction is important. [12] The relative autonomy of the legal profession involves specific responsibilities of self-government. The profession has a responsibility to ensure that its by-laws are designed in the public interest and not in the promotion of narrow-minded or selfish concerns of the Bar Association. Each lawyer is responsible for compliance with the rules of ethics. A lawyer should also help ensure their compliance by other lawyers. Neglecting these responsibilities jeopardizes the independence of the profession and the public interest it serves. • Jurisdiction: Many social work laws are created by the courts in connection with litigation and court decisions. For example, a judge may need to interpret the meaning or application of existing law, resolve conflicts between laws, or fill gaps in existing laws. Such judgments of the Court become precedents or case law.
For example, current guidelines on the requirement for social workers to disclose confidential information without the client`s consent for the protection of third parties were originally established in the 1970s by a major California court case. Decisions about withholding information involve a conflict between truthfulness and deception. There are times when the legal system and professional ethics agree that deception is legitimate and legal. Therapeutic privilege is invoked when the healthcare team makes a decision to withhold information that is considered harmful to the patient. Such a privilege is, by its very nature, questionable. The concept of autonomy has evolved from paternalistic physicians who have had ethical decision-making powers, to patients who are empowered to participate in decisions about their own care, to patients who are heavily armed with Internet resources and are trying to assert themselves in any decision-making. This transition of authority has evolved more slowly in the geriatric population, but as baby boomers age, they affirm this evolving norm of independence.