CASE STUDY
1. Case: Imagine you are in a position to decide whether or not a patient should receive an amputation. However, this is not a typical case – this particular patient has been diagnosed with a rare psychiatric disorder. Patients afflicted by this disorder – called Body Integrity Dysphoria – express a strong desire to become disabled. Furthermore, the patient has a history of attempting to remove his left leg from the knee down without medical supervision and has stated that he will carry out the self-amputation on his own. When asked why he so badly wants to remove his leg, he reports that the leg feels as though it does not belong, as though it is an impostor limb that feels as foreign to him as when he looks at the limbs on other people. The patient realizes that this feeling may appear irrational to outside observers, but shows no other signs of psychiatric illness, no neurological disorders, and is an otherwise fully competent adult. Finally, the patient has not responded well to medication or CBT – that is, none of the only known effective treatments have been successful with this patient.
If the procedure is carried out, you will work on the surgical team to remove the limb, but first, you must decide whether or not it is ethical to perform the amputation before the team proceeds. In your response, refer to the patient as Mr. X or Patient X.
FIRST TASK: Discuss how this case relates to patient autonomy AND health care professional autonomy.
SECOND TASK: Argue FOR the amputation or AGAINST the amputation. USE ONE AND ONLY ONE MORAL THEORY (Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics, etc.) to help argue for your case. You must discuss how the moral theory you chose functions / plays a role in your argument.
Make it very clear to me which parts you are responding to, what your argument is, and how the moral theory you chose to apply fits with your response.
