'MLE Assignment Essay\r'

'1. Ethically, is mind-set destruction not as nett as cardiac death? why or why not? Brain death is final. There is no coming back from it, ever. Neurons die, and the brain ceases to function. Permanently. With cardiac death, we can sometimes use practice of medicine or electricity to resume heart function. A systole (no electrical activity in the heart) can sometimes be reversed if the underlying cause of the puzzle can be treated (such as intense electrolyte abnormalities, or severe hypothermia).\r\n2. How does the Prudent Person conventionalism apply in this case? The prudent reign or â€Å"reasonable man” law dictates that a person act in a direction that is consistent with the skills, logic, resources, and knowledge that an average lay-person may flummox. In medicine, it would apply to a patient in that they be required to take all steps that argon reasonable and prudent to affect a convinced(p) outcome in their treatment. In other words, you would be expected to follow doctor’s orders, do all routine follow up and topographic point therapy, use reasonable judgments and so on. So the reception here is, yes †this does apply to the case because this young miss came into the hospital for a simple surgery removing her tonsils, adenoids, and unneeded sinus tissues. And was shortly agreed brain nonviable after beginning to bleed profusely, and went through cardiac arrest, meaning the serious dysfunction of an organ.\r\n3. In your opinion, could this cataclysm have been prevented? If so, how? In this case I sincerely don’t know the specifics of this particular case, because on that point are so many missing pieces amongst the pre-op and post-op that I’m unsure of how this actually happened to determine if this tragedy could have been prevented. In some cases the parents have to be completely informed as to the ramifications of a situation before making a final decision.\r\n'