Severe Illnesses: A Case Study

In the case of severe illnesses, I believe a blend of medical paternalism and patient autonomy would allow for the best treatment for the patient. Severe illness, for the sake of this paper, can be described as physical or psychological pain that greatly affects the quality of life for the patient with said illness. Medical paternalism is the overriding or restricting of a patient’s rights for their own good. Patient autonomy can be defined as a patient’s self governed choice that reflects their beliefs and values.
In order to illustrate, I will provide a case study as to how a combination of medical paternalism and patient autonomy could be used as the best treatment option. Jessica, a 25-year-old mother of a 3-year-old daughter, is currently in recovering from Anorexia, an eating disorder in which an individual obsesses over their weight, image, and the amount they eat. Jessica has been diagnosed with
One might think that Jessica’s decision making abilities are clouded and that I should use medical paternalism for her own good. Another option would be to respect Jessica’s autonomy and not treat her cancer in order for her to recover from the eating disorder. Though, I believe the best treatment option would be to use a combination of medical paternalism and patient autonomy. In my role as a physician, reflecting on the modern Hippocratic oath, it is my job to care for my patients through humility, compassion, and honesty. I will work with Jessica in understanding her values and what ultimately she feels is best for her. Jessica has suffered from a psychological disorder, but this does not cloud her judgment, rather she requires a more unique style of care than the average individual. Symptoms are generalizable, but treatment cannot be due to the multitude of psychological, cultural, and social influences that affect every