Introduction
The movie John Q captures the moment the Archibald family’s life turns unexpectedly. Michael, the son of John Q and Denise, was found to have cardiomegaly after collapsing on the baseball pitch. The staff at the hospital, Dr. Turner and Rebecca Payne, tell the Archibalds that Michael’s treatment will cost $250,000. John Q seeks help from his insurance company, but is turned down as the policy does not apply under the current circumstances.
Plot and Ethical Dilemma
The family tried numerous other ways to raise money, but it was insufficient. Upon learning that the hospital was adamant about the required funds, Denise urged John to take action. John was not willing to see his son die either.
John decided to walk into the hospital with a shotgun and hold several people hostage, including Dr. Turner. He takes advantage of the hostages in the emergency department room to have his son on the surgery list. He threatened to commit suicide, so his heart was used to treat the son, but another heart had been sourced. The movie raises various ethical concerns in healthcare, including nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice.
Principle of Nonmaleficence
Ethics involves people’s morals and the choices they make. In clinical practice, one of the underlying ethical considerations involves nonmaleficence. The principle dictates that healthcare practitioners balance the risks and benefits to avoid unnecessary patient harm. According to Varkey, nonmaleficence is particularly applicable in complicated end-of-life care determinations, such as the case of Michael (22).
In this case, the hospital resolved to release Michael to go and die at home, seeing as John Q could not raise the down payment. The action contradicted the “no harm” rule since the patient was unstable. The action contradicts the principles of nonmaleficence, which include: do not kill, do not cause pain or suffering, do not cause injustice, and do not deny others the leisure of life.
Principle of Justice
The second ethical concern involves the principle of justice that entails the equitable, fair, and proper treatment of patients. Justice encompasses many elements, but distributive justice is particularly widely applied in clinical practice. Distributive justice entails the equitable, fair, and proper apportionment of healthcare resources. The distribution is defined by justified standards structured on social partnership. Varkey states that the partnership can be established on different credible principles of distributive justice (25).
These include, according to need, contribution, effort, merit, free market exchanges, and an equal share of resources. In the case of John Q, the hospital did not address his case in a manner consistent with the principles of distributive justice. Dr. Turner and Rebecca only informed John Q. and Denice that Michael had cardiomegaly and that he was required to pay a third of the total medical expenses before he could be treated. Even though the amount could not be raised, there was no form of social agreement based on any of the principles of distributive justice to reach a mutually agreed-upon solution. The hospital acted in its own interest, with no regard for John Q’s predicament, even after being turned down by the insurance company.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the movie portrays the challenges faced by ordinary citizens in navigating complex medical and financial issues. John Q’s action of holding people hostage earned him an edge in ensuring that his son was treated. He may have acted exceptionally, but the hospital did not adhere to the required ethical standards in attending to him. In particular, the principles of non-maleficence and distributive justice, which should have been observed under the circumstances, were completely ignored.
Work Cited
Varkey, Basil. “Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice.” Medical Principles and Practice, vol. 30, no. 1. 2021, pp. 17-28. Web.