Case Study: Changing Times

Introduction

Considering the fact that there are many diseases and health problems, it is necessary for physicians to be knowledgeable in the normative and non-normative standards of health and disease. It can be stated that not all patients require the medically indicated care. Consequently, a physician should compromise patient care and even combine the normative and non-normative standards of health and disease. However, it is evident that both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. As a result, the current essay intends to explore advantages and disadvantages of using normative and non-normative standards of health and disease and explain whether it is ethical or unethical to compromise patient care.

Pros and Cons of Non-Normative Standards of Health and Disease

In regard to the non-normative standards of health and disease, health can be understood taking into consideration its natural design as all biological organisms are the products of the biological evolution. It means that non-normative standards of health and disease regard a human being unhealthy, if his/her kidneys cannot remove toxic substances from the blood. Moreover, non-normative standards refer people who drink excessively to unhealthy ones, as well (Tong, 2007). It is evident that non-normative standards of health and disease do not cinsider medicine to be a reliable method of treatment.

The advantages of non-normative standards of health and disease are that they express high demands and criticism. Consequently, they encourage the increase of health and decrease of diseases. Moreover, non-normative standards utilize the natural design as the basement for explaining health issues. Moreover, it is evident that every person has his/her reactions to having any disease. Some people are more optimistic, and it helps them to recover quicker. Others are more pessimistic and gloomy. The strength of non-normative standards is that they are more objective in the analysis of patient’s state. According to non-normative standards, health is a total absence of diseases (Tong, 2007).

The disadvantages of non-normative standards of health and disease are that they diminish the possibilities of medicine. Moreover, they are too critical to the health status. One should say that non-normative standards of health and disease can be subjective considering any disorder diseases. It is evident that non-normative standards of health and disease do not properly use the terms ‘disease’ and ‘health.’ Other disadvantages of non-normative standards are that they neglect the role values that are crucial in determining whether a person is healthy or sick. For example, non-normative standards of health and disease regard homosexuality as a disease (Murphy, 2008).

Pros and Cons of Normative Standards of Health and Disease

Normative standards of health and disease have more supporters than non-normative ones. Moreover, they believe that their principles better reflect the usage of terms ‘disease’ and ‘health’. For example, non-normative standards regard a brain lesion as a diseased state. Normative standards believe that such state is not a disease. It is evident that normative standards of health and disease take medical knowledge as the basement. Consequently, they take into consideration the psychological, biological, and cross-cultural variations (Murphy, 2008).

The advantages of normative standards of health and disease are that they always evaluate every state to understand whether they can be helpful. Moreover, they also label only biological and psychological states. However, non-normative standards of health and disease value only psychological and biological states as the indicators of wellness or disease. It is evident that normative standards of health and disease more accurately describe the usage of terms ‘health’ and ‘disease’. The advantage of normative standards of health and disease is that they distinguish many states influencing health and disease. They are medical, moral, legal, religious, biological, and cross-cultural states (Amundson, 2005).

The disadvantages of normative standards of health and disease are that they idealize the possibilities of medicine. However, it is evident that there is not always the treatment for different diseases. The weakness of normative standards of health and disease is that it ignores natural and biological factors. It is evident that one cannot avoid the label ‘diseased’ despite the normative standards promote it. Moreover, not all psychological and physiological states can be considered healthy. One can say that normative standards of health and disease explain the notion of health in a proper way. However, they fail to use the term ‘disease’ (Cooper, 2002).

Compromising Patient Care

Compromising patient care can be regarded as ethical and unethical decisions. Any physician faces the question to compromise patient care or stay enrolled in the healthcare organization. It is evident that when a physician decides to compromise patient care, then he/she supports the normative standards of health and disease. It means that he/she believes that any disease can be treated and every patient has the right to live. Consequently, he/she bears responsibility for patient’s health and safety and should find the best techniques for treatment.

Compromising patient care can be ethical, if a physician risks saving patient’s life. However, the obligatory condition is the quality of nursing. Moreover, a physician should execute the assessments and interventions appropriately to prevent adverse effects and optimize patient’s outcomes. Another obligatory demand is the complexity and acuity of the patient’s health status and fulfillment of family needs, the capacity for self-care, resources, functional status, and medical conditions. A physician should predict the possible risks and be ready to address them in advance (Cooper, 2002). Moreover, it is necessary for a physician to take into consideration clinical outcomes, care needs and safety, and quality of nursing care.

Compromising patient care can be unethical, if a physician tries to avoid responsibility for the possible risks (Cooper, 2002). Moreover, he/she may ignore the health status of the patient and not take into account his complaints and demands. As a result, compromising patient care, a physician should be ready to possible complications. However, refusing from compromising patient care can also be regarded as the unethical decision as the patient can lose his/her chance for a healthy and rewarding life. It is extremely important to take into consideration normative and non-normative standards of health and disease.

Related Free Healthcare Essays