Informed Consent Quality of Life: Respirating Cadaver Confidentiality :: Medicine Ethics

Informed Consent Quality of Life: Respirating Cadaver Confidentiality Artificial Heart: What makes humans human Artificial Heart Research vs. Quality of Life Informed Consent-Therapeutic Misconception Using humans as guinea pigs-respect for human life Barney Clark was used as a guinea pig. The patient was not going to benefit from the procedure but the procedure was done to try to improve the surgery for the whole of society. The chances of his prolonged survival were nearly nonexistent. Pros- The procedure could have improved the outcome for future patients of artificial heart transplants. The improvement of medicine to benefit whole of society. There are now models of artificial hearts that can lead to better chances for heart patients. Cons- The patients autonomy is compromised due to the fact the procedure would not benefit him in any way. The therapeutic effect is non-existent for Barney Clark and there is a possibility that there would be therapeutic misconception by Barney Clark thinking the surgery would in someway save his life. The use of humans for research does not show respect for the human life and what it represents and goes against the idea of beneficence since no good is being done for the patient. Quality of Life: Respirating Cadaver Following the surgery, Barney Clark was rendered almost completely immobile by the large machinery that was attached to him at all times. For the 112 days Barney Clark lived he was riddled by constant infection and he had several strokes due to clotting in the artificial heart. Pros- At least he was alive. Cons- The quality of life was terrible for Barney Clark after the surgery. The surgery did not save his life, it prolonged his death. With his immobility and constant pain from the Jarvik-7 Barney Clark probably would have been better off just allowing himself to die of the original heart failure.