Practice of Biomedical Ethics

Biomedical Ethics

Values and principles that reflect morals and biomedical needs of persons in the health care world.

---

Artifact Story:

The Right State of Equipoise in Clinical Trials

Biomedical Ethics Essay Photo Link to: "The Rights State of Equipoise in Clinical Trials

Abstract

An ongoing debate in the biomedical world is the state of equipoise at which a physician should decide to abide by when selecting clinical trials for patients (Brennan et al. 2013). Equipoise is defined as the state of decision making of physicians to select a clinical trial for a patient which includes the theoretical equipoise and clinical equipoise (Brennan et al. 2013). Further, clinical equipoise is the state in which, physicians decides a clinical trial that seeks to resolve the collective conflict of interests other physicans in society (Brennan et al. 2013). The duty of beneficence and the doctor's commitment to the contractual relationship is one reasoning behind the argument for theoretical equipoise over clinical equipoise (Brennan et al. 2013). Further, beneficience is the physican's accountability to provide medical support accordingly which engages a contractual relationship between the physician and patient based on trust (Brennan et al. 2013). On the other hand, theoretical equipoise is the state, which involves the physican acting alone in choosing a clinical trial for a patient and is confronted with the dilemma of two options which offer equal chances for therapeutic benefits or possible side effects (Brennan et al. 2013). In opposition, one can disagree and state that theoretical equipoise might involve the physican to act on false reasonings and judgement in the selection of a clinical trial for a pateint (Brennan et al. 2013). This discussion argues the state of theoretical equipoise as a more ethical state than clinical equipoise (Brennan et al. 2013).

Results

In the composition of the discussion paper, I was able to argue theoretical equipoise over clinical equipoise when a physican is confronted with choosing a clinical research study for a patient. I supported my claim by statiing that physicans are motivated by their contractual relarionship and the responisbility of beneficience. Therefore they are acting on not only medical judement but also moral judgement and the needs of the patient. Additonally, I stated that in clinical equipoise, there is a greater possibility of malpractice. Thus, in theortrical equipoise there is a lower risk of malpractice, due to the fact the physican makes decisions with the intent of assisting the patient's medical needs while clinical equipoise seeks the resolution in the arguments of clinical trials among physicans in the scientific community. In response to the counter-arguement, I contested that physicians act as the sole decision-maker who is competent in medical knowldege and the medical situation of the patient and able to choose a clinical trial, on the basis of medical reasoning and the patient's needs and interests.

Reflection

This essay allowed me to gain a better understanding of equipoise and the different states of equipoise through my arguments. I learned the importance of practice of biomedical ethics by the idea that one should advocate for patient's rights and interests when faced with biomedical decisions and their health. Further, a health professional must be compliant and determine an agreement in the discussion of health procedures and clinical trials for a patient. Therefore, if one is faced with a confrontation of the law, biomedical science and the patient's rights and interests, then must be prepared to approach scenarios involving conflict of judgements in the health care sector. In the workplace, I would be comitted to improving beneficience and be compelled to promote the health rights and needs of individuals, especially vulnerable populations. With my interdisicplinary interests in sociology and health policy, I am devoted to social justice, patient autonomy, community healing and self-efficacy. While aiming to enhance the quality of life in health prevention and promoting healthy public policy.

References:

Brennan, Samantha., Skelton, Anthony and Weijer, Charles. Bioethics in Canada. Oxford University Press. Canada. 2013. Print.

Freedman, Benjamin. 1987. "Equipoise and the Ethics of Clinical Research". The New England Journal of Medicine. Accessed from: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198707163170304

Arguments from Freedman were mostly derived from the "Bioethics in Canada" and I declare that all arguements of Freedman conveyed here or in the Essay are cited and given credit to Freedman which serve for the application and displaying my practice and understanding of biomedical ethics. No copyright was intended.

Sevilleno, Jeanine 2017. "The Right State of Equipoise in Clinical Trials".