Students are to complete the case studies listed below and develop a concept map according to the attached “Nursing Process Paper: Concept Mapping”. After the student completes the Case Study and Concept Map, please grade the case study (answers attached) and grade the concept map according to the “Concept Map Evaluation Criteria”.
At the end of the semester the following must be submitted:
· Completed case studies graded
· Completed Concept Maps graded with a completed rubric for each one
· Completed Student Evaluation
Please note all documents are attached to assist your success.
CASE STUDIES
Harding, M. & Snyder, J.S. (2016) Clinical Reasoning Cases in Nursing (7th ed.). St. Louis, MO:
Elsevier Mosby. – Required Textbook
Diabetes Type 2
Case Study 91 Page 411-414
Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
Case Study 70 Page 313-316
Inflammatory Bowel Disease with Small Bowel
Case Study 62 Page 279-283
Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Case Study 40 Page 180-185
Fractured Hip with Postoperative Complications
Case Study 46 Page 205-209
Coronary Artery Disease and Heart Failure
Case Study 4 Page 14-18
ZOOM
LIU has purchased an upgraded zoom account in which you can meet with your group of students for an unlimited amount of time. You will need to set up a zoom account through the LIU Zoom: liu.zoom.us (log in and password are the same as your LIU username and password). Once you have a zoom account, there are webinars, live and pre-recorded that you can access to learn how to use zoom. The basics are intuitive, but if you have never done it before, play with it before you meet with your group. Here is a link to a 30 minute introductory webinar to learn the basics: https://liu.zoom.us/rec/play/ucYoIumtq243G9fAswSDUPArW9W-eKis1Cga8_EPmk7mAnFQMAevZ7IQZefBr9eLpOtBNxuUZZ4WFxrQ?continueMode=true
LIU Information Technology (IT) is also available to help with any technical difficulties you or your students might have. Below is the IT contact information. Centralized helpdesk support will be available daily for faculty by emailing IT@LIU.edu or by calling 516-299-3300/718-488-3300. An extensive online support library is also available at http://IT.LIU.EDU
Solution:
Reflection on Case Study: Fetal Abnormality
Introduction
The case study “Fetal Abnormality” presents an ethically complex scenario in which multiple perspectives emerge regarding the moral status of a fetus diagnosed with serious abnormalities. The discussion highlights tensions between medical, familial, and moral considerations. This reflection will analyze the Christian view of the nature of human persons and its connection to moral status, examine the theories used by each character in the case, evaluate how those theories influence their recommendations, and conclude with a personal position supported by topic study materials.
Christian View of the Nature of Human Persons and Moral Status
Christian theology affirms that human beings are created imago Dei—in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26-27). This view maintains that the worth and dignity of human life are intrinsic and not dependent on characteristics such as ability, development, or social contribution (Meilaender, 2013). The sanctity of life principle asserts that from conception, human beings possess inherent dignity because their identity is rooted in divine creation rather than contingent features.
This view aligns most closely with the theory of moral status based on human properties. According to this theory, moral status is grounded in the simple fact of being human, regardless of physical or cognitive abilities (Khan Academy, n.d.). The Christian perspective rejects utilitarian or functionalist approaches, which might assign varying degrees of value based on a person’s abilities or societal role. Instead, Christianity insists on the universality of human dignity as an unchanging reality bestowed by God.
Thus, intrinsic value and dignity are not earned but given. A fetus, no matter how impaired, is considered a bearer of divine image and therefore possesses full moral status.
Theories Used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson
Jessica (the mother):
Jessica struggles with guilt and worry, particularly about the potential burden of caring for a child with serious disabilities. Her reasoning reflects the theory based on cognitive properties. She appears to believe that moral status may be diminished if the child cannot develop rationality, independence, or quality of life. The case indicates she feels conflicted about whether bringing the child to term would be a mistake, revealing her leaning toward a view that links moral worth to future functioning.
Marco (the father):
Marco wants to support Jessica but defers responsibility, claiming it is her decision. His reasoning reflects the theory based on relationships. He places the decision within the context of his marital relationship, prioritizing Jessica’s role as the mother and their relationship dynamic. The emphasis is not on the fetus itself but on relational obligations, suggesting he interprets moral status through the lens of his connection to Jessica rather than the intrinsic worth of the unborn child.
Maria (the aunt):
Maria is clearly guided by her religious convictions, stating that terminating the pregnancy would be wrong regardless of difficulty. She operates from the theory based on human properties, closely aligned with the Christian perspective. Maria views the fetus as possessing full moral status simply by virtue of being human. Her insistence that life should be preserved reflects the sanctity of life doctrine.
Dr. Wilson (the physician):
Dr. Wilson advises termination due to the anticipated poor quality of life for the child and the strain it would cause the parents. His reasoning aligns with the theory based on sentience and possibly utilitarian thinking. He emphasizes the suffering the child would endure and the burden on the family, suggesting that moral status is dependent on the capacity to experience pleasure and pain. By prioritizing avoidance of suffering, he assigns conditional moral worth to the fetus.
Influence of Theories on Recommendations
The theories adopted by each character clearly shape their recommendations:
-
Jessica’s cognitive properties view influences her to consider termination, as she doubts the fetus’s ability to achieve independence or “normal” functioning.
-
Marco’s relational approach leads him to defer to Jessica, framing the decision as primarily her moral responsibility rather than his.
-
Maria’s human properties view leads her to insist on continuing the pregnancy, holding that intrinsic dignity outweighs hardship.
-
Dr. Wilson’s sentience/utilitarian view prompts him to recommend abortion as the most compassionate choice for reducing suffering and difficulty.
Each recommendation is logically consistent with the theory of moral status they implicitly endorse.
Personal Position and Preferred Theory
The theory most compelling to me is the human properties theory, particularly as it resonates with the Christian understanding of the person. A person’s dignity and worth cannot be contingent on developmental stage, potential, or relational roles. If moral worth depends on sentience or cognitive functioning, then infants, individuals with profound disabilities, or those in comas would lack full moral status—an untenable conclusion.
From this perspective, the fetus in the case study possesses full dignity regardless of abnormalities. The recommendation would therefore be to continue the pregnancy while preparing adequate medical, emotional, and social support for the family. While the challenges may be great, the moral obligation to respect life remains paramount.
This position is supported by topic study materials, which emphasize that intrinsic dignity is not diminished by disability or suffering (Meilaender, 2013). Instead of eliminating the fetus, Christian ethics would call for a compassionate response to both the child and the parents through supportive care.
Conclusion
The case study of fetal abnormality reveals the profound impact of moral status theories on ethical decision-making. Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson each approach the issue from different frameworks, leading to divergent recommendations. The Christian view, grounded in human properties, affirms intrinsic human dignity from conception and aligns with the sanctity of life. Personally, I find this view most persuasive because it safeguards the equal worth of all human beings, regardless of condition. Ultimately, embracing this perspective leads to a recommendation that upholds life while also addressing the practical and emotional needs of the family with compassion and support.
References
Khan Academy. (n.d.). Moral status. In Wi-Phi: Open access philosophy. https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/wi-phi/wiphi-value-theory/wiphi-ethics/v/moral-status
Meilaender, G. (2013). Bioethics: A primer for Christians (3rd ed.). Eerdmans.
