** All Discussion Must be 250 words a piece *** Discussion 1: What potential reasons might keep a patient from signing a DNR e.g., peer-pressure, finances, other reasons? Explain your answers. Discussion 2: What are the distinctions between criminal and civil law? How does the “Standard of Proof” play a part in the outcome of a verdict? Discussion 3: List 3 potential situations that could bring about ethical dilemmas in medicine. Discuss the positives and negatives of each.

Discussion 1:

There are several potential reasons that may prevent a patient from signing a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order. One reason could be peer-pressure, where the patient feels influenced by family members or friends who may not fully understand the patient’s wishes or the implications of a DNR order. The patient may face resistance or judgment from their loved ones, causing them to hesitate or feel guilty about making such a decision. Financial concerns can also play a role in the patient’s decision. They may fear that fewer medical interventions or resuscitation attempts could lead to a quicker deterioration of their health, resulting in increased medical costs or burdens on their family. This financial strain can be a significant barrier for some patients.

Moreover, religious or cultural beliefs can influence a patient’s decision-making process. Some religions may encourage the preservation of life at all costs, making it difficult for adherents to accept the idea of a DNR order. These beliefs may create internal conflicts for the patient, leading to a hesitancy to sign the order.

Another reason that may prevent a patient from signing a DNR order is a lack of knowledge or misconceptions about resuscitation procedures. The patient may not fully understand that a DNR order only applies to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and not other life-sustaining treatments. They may fear that signing a DNR order means abandoning all medical interventions, which could result in their death even in situations where other treatments could be beneficial.

Furthermore, some individuals may hold a mistrust of healthcare professionals or the healthcare system in general. They may worry that signing a DNR order could be seen as giving consent to withholding care in other situations, leading to a lack of trust in the medical team’s commitment to their well-being. This lack of trust may make it challenging for the patient to make an informed decision about signing a DNR order.

In conclusion, several factors can contribute to a patient’s hesitation or resistance in signing a DNR order. These may include peer-pressure, financial concerns, religious or cultural beliefs, lack of knowledge or misconceptions about resuscitation procedures, and a mistrust of healthcare professionals or the healthcare system. Understanding and addressing these potential reasons can help facilitate discussions about end-of-life care and support patients in making informed decisions about their healthcare preferences.

Discussion 2:

The distinctions between criminal and civil law lie in their objective and the consequences they aim to uphold. Criminal law deals with offenses that are considered harmful to society as a whole, while civil law handles disputes between private individuals or entities. The “Standard of Proof” plays a crucial role in the outcome of a verdict in both criminal and civil cases.

In a criminal case, the “Standard of Proof” is much higher and is commonly known as “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This means that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused to such an extent that no reasonable doubt is left in the minds of the jurors. This high standard is designed to protect the rights of the accused and ensure that they are not wrongfully convicted. It recognizes the grave consequences that criminal convictions can have on an individual’s liberty and reputation.

In contrast, civil cases have a lower standard of proof, known as “preponderance of the evidence.” This means that the evidence presented must establish that it is more likely than not that the defendant is liable for the harm or breach of duty alleged by the plaintiff. The goal of civil law is not to punish the defendant but rather to compensate the plaintiff for any damages suffered or to enforce contractual obligations. Therefore, the standard of proof in civil cases is less stringent than in criminal cases.

The “Standard of Proof” in both criminal and civil cases impacts the outcome of a verdict in different ways. In criminal cases, a high standard of proof means that the burden lies heavily on the prosecution to present compelling evidence that leaves no reasonable doubt. If the prosecution fails to meet this standard, the defendant must be acquitted. This emphasis on the standard of proof in criminal cases serves to protect individuals from being wrongfully convicted and facing severe punishments.

In civil cases, the lower standard of proof ensures that a verdict can still be reached even if absolute certainty cannot be established. The preponderance of the evidence standard allows for a balance of probabilities rather than absolute certainty. If the evidence shows that it is more likely than not that the defendant is liable, the plaintiff can be awarded damages or other remedies.

In conclusion, the distinctions between criminal and civil law lie in their objectives and the consequences they aim to uphold, with criminal law dealing with offenses against society and civil law addressing private disputes. The “Standard of Proof” plays a significant role in both types of cases, with a higher standard required in criminal cases to protect the rights of the accused, and a lower standard in civil cases to achieve compensation or enforcement of obligations.