I believe the ethical considerations in Brownfield v. Daniel Freeman Marina Hospital is for all hospitals to provide all information and access to emergency contraceptives to sexual assault and rape victims. In the defense of Brownfield, emergency contraceptives, Plan B, and oral synthetic hormones is the most common type of emergency contraceptives that should have been disclosed to her upon her request. These contraceptives are often called the "morning after pill or Plan B".
Some legal considerations are the Principles of Informed Consent. What this principle imposes is it allows a competent individual to advance his or her own welfare. This right and responsibility is performed by freely and willingly consenting or refusing consent to recommended medical procedures, based on a sufficient knowledge of the benefits, burdens, and risks involved. The ability to give informed consent depends on: 1) adequate disclosure of information; 2) patient freedom of choice; 3) patient comprehension of information; and 4) patient capacity for decision-making. By meeting these requirements, three necessary conditions are satisfied: 1) that the individuals decision is voluntary; 2) that this decision is made with an appropriate understanding of the circumstances; and 3) that the patients choice is deliberate insofar as the patient has carefully considered all of the expected benefits, burdens, risks and reasonable alternatives. ("Ethical issues consent," 2012) This becomes a matter of a legal issue when the Principles of Informed Consent can be proven in court that the victim was not given such information or allowed to exercise this principle.
Supporters of this act argue that emergency contraception is a medically accepted way of preventing pregnancy and does not represent an abortion. A group specifically formed to make sure access to emergency contraception for rape, incest, and domestic...