In: Nursing
You are the hospital administrator for a county hospital, which is funded in a large part by that county's property taxes. You discover that you have an indigent patient who has been mistakenly admitted as an inpatient to the hospital strictly for dialysis treatment. The hospital does not, as a general practice, provide only dialysis treatment for patients. This is beyond the scope of the hospital's mandate and is therefore, an inappropriate use of local property tax funding.
If the indigent patient is discharged from the hospital and dialysis treatment is terminated, the patient will become toxic and experience severe physical consequences, even death. However, if the patient is kept in the hospital for purposes of dialysis treatment only, the hospial must assume the burden of the patients debt, without revenue to cover the associated cost.
Evaluation of alternative solutions.
Solution chosen and how to implement it with the stakeholders.
Conclusion and reflection of this process.
(A) EVALUATION:-
-In all organizations, decisions have to be made and it is
important to have an effective decision-making model to
utilize.
-Decision-making becomes complicated when individuals are met with
legal dilemmas whereby alternative actions may result in serious
consequences.
-In the given scenario, an indigent patient has been admitted to a
hospital by accident for dialysis treatment.
-As the hospital is funded by property taxes and does not only
provide dialysis treatment, the administrator needs to make a
decision as to retain the patient and let the hospital bear the
burden of the healthcare costs incurred or reject the patient and
run the risk of life-threatening health consequences for the
patient.
-This case will evaluate the legal dilemma and discuss the decision
which the hospital should make. In this case, the hospital should
opt to accept the patient because the benefits of this decision
outweigh the costs
(B) ALTERNATIVES AND CONSEQUENCES:-
-There are two alternatives which the hospital administrator can
take.
(a)The first alternative is to
keep the patient :- by keeping the patient, the hospital will need
to incur higher costs. This is because it is inappropriate to use
the local property tax funding to cover the cost of patients solely
requiring dialysis treatment. As such, this may hinder the
hospital’s ability to provide for and cover the healthcare costs of
other patients. However, the positive side of this decision is that
the indigent patient would be able to gain access to the necessary
healthcare assistance required.
(b) second alternative is to
discharge the patient.
-by discharging the patient,
the cost would be that the patient would become toxic and
experience severe health consequences, including death, if he is
unable to gain access to the necessary healthcare speedily.
However, the advantage of such a decision would be that the costs
incurred by the hospital would be minimized. Hence, the hospital
would be in a better position to provide for the healthcare of
other patients.
-By weighing the costs and
benefits of the two alternatives, it can be argued that the costs
of discharging the patient far outweigh the benefits.
-This is because the life of
an individual is priceless and cannot be measured in terms of
monetary costs incurred.
- It would be immoral for an
organization to reject offering services to someone in need,
especially when the organization is still in the position to
provide the services and when the consequence of rejecting the
individual would result in the death of the person.
(C) CONCLUSION:-
- the decision which the hospital administrator should make is to
keep the patient in the hospital because the benefits of this
decision far outweigh the costs.
- The hospital cannot make up for any losses to the patient should
the patient die or suffer serious health consequences due to the
hospital’s refusal to keep him.