ethical writing

anonymous asked:

What would happen when there's an autistic kid in the hospital (broken arm, multiple deep lacerations, mild concussion) who went nonverbal and physically cannot talk at the time? The kid knows sign language, and so do their parents. Would hospital staff let the parents translate, or would they go get their own translator?

Hey there! So this is one of those special cases where how people respond is going to depend a lot on their institution etc. Typically, providers will rely on those familiar with ASD patients to help get compliance. Nobody knows the kid better than their parents and teachers.

If ASL is how the kid communicates, at this time and in this place, then that’s how they communicate. Ideally if a member on staff understands ASL they might get involved in the kid’s care, but if not, they’re unlikely to go to the trouble of FaceTime-ing a translator and will likely just rely on the parents….

….with one major assumption. If the injury pattern looks at all like it could even remotely have been abuse, whether it’s injuries that don’t match the story or whatever, the hospital can’t just inherently trust the parents’ word. (They’re also mandated reporters of abuse, so they have to tread very carefully in these cases). In those cases a translator would either physically be brought to the bedside or consulted by video link.

I hope this was helpful! xoxo, Aunt Scripty

disclaimer    

2

23/100

So I was just sitting writing my essay for ethics when my mum brought in the post and I found I have an UNCONDITIONAL OFFER TO STUDY LAW. That literally never happens.

anonymous asked:

You recently mentioned a DNR - do not resuscitate. How would a medical worker know if someone has a DNR wish? Also, what would happen if, say, someone attempts suicide, another person finds them and calls 911, but the person who attempted suicide tells the responders they don't want medical attention or don't wish to be resuscitated?

Hey there anon! DNRs are very important in the ethics of medicine. We want to respect people’s wishes. It’s just that we can’t sometimes.

A DNR form is something that’s signed between a patient and their doctor that says that they do not want to be resuscitated in the event of cardiac arrest. It’s a physical piece of paper that goes home with the patient, who will typically have a terminal illness. In a world that’s working properly, it will be on the fridge or taped above the person’s bed. Some people opt for a DNR bracelet, but I’ve never seen one in real life.

However, there are some exclusions, at least in my service area, for how DNRs work. For starters, without a physical piece of paper or a bracelet, paramedics are required to attempt resuscitation if the person is in cardiac arrest. Your word is not good enough. A healthcare proxy, power of attorney or living will are not good enough, at least in my state. (Other places may vary, but this isn’t it.)

They also don’t apply to trauma. So if you have Stage IV small-cell lung cancer, and you are going to die in a week, and you get hit by a bus while you’re crossing the street, you can have all the paperwork you want and a bracelet on every limb; we are still required to resuscitate you. That is not negotiable.

Doctors have the ability to talk to families, determine wishes, and stop rescuscitation, but we don’t.

As for suicide attempts, we absolutely ignore someone’s request to refuse treatment for anything that might save their life. We base that decision on a circular piece of ethical reasoning: a reasonable person would want their life saved; anyone who has attempted suicide is not reasonable; therefor, we ignore their wishes and save their lives.

Honestly, this is one of those parts of my job that makes me sick and sad and angry and makes me feel disgusted with myself. I think that, in the case of someone’s terminal illness, they deserve the chance to die with dignity, and that their feelings about resuscitation should always be honored if they’re known. I’m not a fan of having to do CPR when a lawyer with her own living will clearly stated she didn’t want to be resuscitated. It  makes me sick to my stomach.

I have no problem, on the other hand, saving the lives of the suicidal. While I believe that suicide is someone’s choice, I have also seen enough people who have attempted suicide and failed who have begged me to save their lives that I don’t want to let anyone die who could be saved. (I also believe in assisted suicide, and even euthanasia; my feelings about death are complicated and nuanced and painful and weird).

I hope this helps with your stories. xoxo, Aunt Scripty

disclaimer

One of the go to catch phrases these days is “be in the moment”. But I tend to think this is sort of a non-sensical idea, at least stated this way, because the present moment is always in the past and the future.

The present is always in the past because the present is always the summation and totality of everything past, the present is nothing but everything the past has amounted to, it is in a sense nothing but everything that has come before, everything which has led up to what now is. The past constitutes what IS in the present, so to be in the present means quite literally to be in the past, in its totality.

At the same time, the present is always in the future, at least in human experience; we don’t experience the present as simply ‘present’ for us, it is always loaded with potential and possibility, of what might happen, what we can do, what we need to do, what we ought to do. The future constitutes the OUGHT or the SHOULD of the present, what we hope for out of it, what it might become. To be simply in the present seems as if it would neglect all the possibility that the world holds, all the things that might be, but isn’t this possibility - the possibility which constitutes the future - an important part of the present?

The present then always has these two components, the IS of the past and the OUGHT of the future. The present moment itself is nothing but the passing of the OUGHT to be, into the HAS BEEN, the bridge between past and future, the IS and the OUGHT.

It is my view that this is the fundamental structure of time, on a cosmic level. Time is not the sequencing of moments which act as a backdrop for determined changes; time is instead the passing of the OUGHT to be into the HAS BEEN, where each HAS BEEN re-arranges itself and orders itself, to understand itself, in order to throw itself again into the OUGHT, drawing the OUGHT always into itself. Thus reality continually selects itself, learns from what it has selected, learns how to better learn about its own selection process. We as human beings, are participating in this selection, we are in time, from the moment we are born, we are already in time, taking part in the drawing forth of the OUGHT into the IS. We are part of a cosmic becoming.

So I think what “being in the moment” really means is not what comes across immediately the way it is usually stated. I think being in the moment really means being equally in the past and the future, equally in the IS and the OUGHT and not being lost in either, but actively participating in drawing actuality (the IS) from possibility (the OUGHT). To be fully present means to take on a wholistic experience of time, past, present and future.

—  What does it mean to “be in the moment”?
youtube

Ellevation (Elise Bauman & Ellevan) Talking Work Ethic and Song Writing Process

So I have this Ethics test tomorrow, and it’s 3 essay questions. He lets us have 1 cheat sheet (it’s one sided and has to be handwritten) and he gave us 5 questions (the test will be a random 3 picks from the total 5) and I think I probably could have written bigger.

I only have one more block of text that I wanted on my sheet. Guess I can start writing my answers to the questions??

I was thinking the other day about the ethics of an autism cure, in the hypothetical situation that there was a cure. (This will never happen, but suppose it did.)

To cure autism, you would need to completely rewire a person’s brain. The entire brain chemistry would be completely different. Since autism is pervasive, you would need to essentially change everything about the person. Since autism isn’t baggage you can remove or a mental illness, there is no person underneath “autism”. It is flat out an inherent part of your personality.

For nonverbal autistics, this would be catastrophic. If they were unable to communicate using alternate methods, they would not be capable of giving consent for a procedure that would alter their entire state of being. 

When people talk about a cure, they’re often talking about nonverbal autistics and how it would make life easier for them. Would it really? Or would it make it easier for you, a non-autistic person? Furthermore, if a nonverbal autistics can’t communicate in a way neurotypicals will listen to, they cannot tell them what they want. 

In a way, you would essentially be killing the original person by completely rewiring that person’s brain. It would be similar to a lobotomy in that it would completely change a person forever in almost every way. (Not a perfect analogy, but I couldn’t think of another pervasive procedure.)

The ethical ramifications would be enormous. Messing with other peoples’ brains is definitely a morally grey area. Why are we so uncomfortable when we hear about mind control? Because we’re afraid of our autonomy being taken away, which is what an autism cure would do.

writing experiment

okokok so i’ve been stuck in a rut with my writing and everything else in my life for a good few months now, i can still write, but i’ve lost the motivation and discipline to write regularly. i’ve tried doing the ‘write a couple of hundred words a day’ thing but my mentality just does not jive with self-set goals because i’m a lazy little shit, so to try and kick my arse into gear i’m gonna try something new:

i’m going to have a new chap/oneshot ready to upload every week. (starting next sat)

this should be a reasonable goal, i’ve written chaps in shorter times before, and i’m far more motivated by terror of letting other people down than by letting myself down which i do on an hourly basis anyway eyyy.

i’m not sure how well this experiment is gonna go but if anyone who’s into my writing could like/reblog/reply to this so that i know i’ve got people who i’ve gotta pull it out for then hopefully that’ll get the old panic monster keeping my instant-gratification monkey under control.

i might also start doing a kinda vote thing?? like right now i just want to get chap 6 of SITS up cause it’s been months and both my other ongoings have been updated fairly recently, but after that i might do some kinda poll for what fic you folks want me to update next? and maybe add some of the random oneshot ideas i’ve got kicking around???

idk if anyone’s got thoughts on that they’d be super welcome, but for now: chap 6 of SITS will be up on sat (and if it’s not yall have full reign to Shame me)

thank you for listening to my rambling and have a lovely day/night!