Sarah Doren

Professional Roles I

Ethics Case Reflection

November 13, 2019

Case – Determining the Best Choice: Is it ethical to treat a family member?

Reflection questions:

1. What was the central ethical issue you encountered in this case?
a. The central issue that we encountered in our case was whether or
not it is ethical for a PT to treat their spouse. There were other smaller
issues involved, such as conflicts with the insurance company and a
lack of other cervical spine specialists in the area.
2. How would you resolve this ethical issue? Do you agree with the theorist
you used as a reference for solving this case?
a. I agree with the decision that we decided upon as a group. I would
resolve this issue by allowing Larry to treat his wife Cheryl. We were
guided largely by the theory of principlism when solving the case. I
do agree with this theory because it really simplifies the details into
four main priorities of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence
and justice. Autonomy was important in regards to Cheryl having
the right to choose the best PT for her situation. Beneficence guided
us towards our decision since it enforces doing good for the patient.
Nonmaleficence was a key factor in making a quick decision and
in the fact that a less qualified PT could cause more harm than
good in Cheryl’s case. Lastly, we were guided by the principle of
justice, in which Larry could treat Cheryl but only if he showed
fairness to her, his other patients, and in his practice as a whole.
3. Did the group’s choice differ from yours? If you were the only person
involved what would you have decided to do (vs. what the group
decided)?
a. We came to our decision fairly quickly and unanimously. I agreed
with the overall decision. If I was the only one deciding, I still would
have chosen for Larry to treat Cheryl but I probably would have
been less confident in the decision.
4. What still confuses you about this case?
a. The only thing that confused me about the case was the warning
from the insurance company that Larry should not treat Cheryl. I did
not understand if it was Larry’s personal insurance or his
business/malpractice insurance. I also wasn’t sure how much
weight to put into the warning.
5. What did you learn about yourself from participating in this assignment
and how can you apply this when you get to clinic?
a. During this ethical decision making with my group, I learned that I
am not afraid of discussing ethical situations with others. I actually
enjoy the deeper thinking that these cases require. I am also
growing in my ability as a listener and as a team member. During
this project I was very open to others ideas. I found it very interesting
to see how my group members justified the decisions and the
process that brought them to the decision.