The Nmc Code Of Conduct Nursing Essay

The Nmc Code Of train Nursing EssayNursing is a job regulated by the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC 2008). The NMC is an organisation set up by the Parliament to cling to the public by ensuring that adjudges and midwives provide eminent standards of cargon to their tolerants. These healthc are schoolmasters are also responsible for their birth motions. The system sets standards for education, radiation diagram and conduct as well as providing advice for makes and midwives. The NMC also considers allegations of fumble or unfitness to practice. Using the shield study presumptuousness(p), it shall be the writers intention to demonstrate the discernment of the NMC Code of take up suggesting ways in which it stack be apply to practice. In order to comply with the NMC Code of Conduct of confidentiality, the longanimous to be discussed in this assignment will be referred to as Mrs X. Furthermore the author will explore the four-spot main principles of the mark r elating them to issues arising out of the case study. The author will also demonstrate the under rest of honourable issues arising, analysing and discussing autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence and justice.The case study refers to an 80 year champion-time(a) woman with a hip fracture, admitted to a hospital ward from a nursing home and desperately added to the operation list. She is bedridden, with prankish heart business and in first stages of Alzheimers sickness and appeared to be coherent and lucid as recorded. She concord to eat up a hip replacement operation afterwardswards the advisor explained the procedure. On her way to theatre, she changes her headway and the consultant was sure. The consultant insists on drop deading, citing a busy week ahead and commenting that these gray lost patients dont recognize their own legal opinion.According to the NMC Code of Conduct, a healthcare professional has a duty to care and protect the interest of those in their ca re regardless of age, gender, culture, religious and political beliefs. Mrs X is 80 years old provided the professionals still hold a duty of care and must protect her interests. An interview was carried out by the medical exam exam examination staff and the patient appeared coherent and lucid but Mrs X has changed her perspicacity on route to theatre. This author will critically examine the procedures that followed. The consultant explained the procedure to the patient who agreed to switch the operation. Thompson et al (1994) give tongue to that communication is mavin of the funda moral aspects in nursingThe consultant was informed of the patients conclusion to change her mind on the operation and responds stating that We will have to proceed.As a nurse one could en grapple that the consultant should none this decision as breathing out against it would be breaching the NMC code. Mrs Xs decision to change her mind on the way to theatre, non wanting(p) to go ahead wi th the operation should be respected. Hope et al (2008) verbalize that a patients autonomy can allow for in conflict, raise honorable dilemmas and may not be straight forward. Autonomy is defined as the proper to choose or ref using up treatment .Beauchamp and Childress (2009). The consultant could also argue that he is working in the break(p) interest of the patient but does this override the patients right to make her own decision? Beauchamp and Childress (2009) stated that individuals views and rights must be respected as long as these individuals fantasys and action do not cause molest to former(a) people. The NMC makes a bit of highlighting the point of advocating for patients. In this exemplar, the nurse faces the ethical dilemma of standing up to the consultant and advocating for the patient in order to uphold the code. Thompson (2003, cited in Buka, 2008) suggests that ethics is a study of how people behave, what they do, the rationalnesss they give for their acti ons and the justification hind end their decision. The need to maintain professional bouncinessaries as well means that nurses have to raise their points in a manner that does not destabilise the team. individually and ein truth member of the healthcare team must act as the patients advocate and remind or challenge colleagues should they fail to practice accord to standards, Hindle and Coates (2011). If any medical team members working with the consultant on Mrs Xs case are not in agreement with his decision to proceed, they should challenge or remind him of the ethical code stipulating that the patients decision must be respected. When healthcare professionals are faced with dilemmas, patients should always come first. Childs et al (2009) states that when considering our actions we are bound by NMC codes, standards and guidelines, for students guidelines set by their training institution by local anaesthetic standards and guidelines within the clinical practice area and by the practice of law of the country. It is unskilled and unlawful to force treatment on anyone.Although the consultant explained the procedure, one could argue that devising information available is contrastive from effective communication. Consent was given the first time but the patient later changed her mind. An exploration for her reason to change her mind should have interpreted place and at least inform the patient that the operation was going ahead and the reasons for going ahead.The phrasing utilize by the consultant could be a concern. We will have to proceed. We have a very busy week ahead these sr. confused patients dont know their own mind. Carry on as usual. whizz could interpret that the consultant is suggesting that when people get old, they automatically become confused which could be stereotyping amounting to discrimination which is against the law. This could be interpreted to suggest that the consultant is of the assurance that the elderly are confused and d ont know whats right-hand(a) for themselves and so should have decisions made for them. Patients are supposed to be treated with dignity, respect and as individuals considering their physical, psychological and social care with decisions made in partnership with clinicians, or else than by clinicians alone according to DOH (2010).Hendnrick (2004) defines acquiesce as the authority given by patient voluntarily, without pressure, force or manipulation or undue influence. The NMC emphasises that healthcare professionals must seek bear from their patients otherwise they aptitude be liable to be charged with assault or battery. The consent could either be in writing or verbal. In the termination of a law suit, much(prenominal) documents and discussions can then be used in courts of law. Although Mrs X had given consent for the operation to proceed, health professionals should respect the withdrawal of consent. Proceeding with the planned operation against Mrs Xs wish amounts to v iolation of her rights and the nurse has a duty to highlight this aspect.The Mental Capacity make up (2005) was schematic to empower and to protect vulnerable people in making their own decisions. In particular, this was to safeguard those who pretermit skill and those who have difficulties in making decisions because of illness, disability and those with mental health problems. The mental capacity act has four main principles of capacityA psyche must be assumed to have capacity unless it is proved otherwise. Mrs X should be deemed to have capacity as she was interviewed and appeared coherent and lucid.Any act or decision taken on behalf of person absentminded capacity must be in the persons best interest. The consultant could argue he was working in the best interest of the patient. In the event that Mrs X lacks capacity, an advocate could be name to act on her behalf.An unwise decision is not to be taken as a lack of capacity. Even though Mrs X changed her mind and appear s to have made an unwise decision, this should not be seen as lack of capacity.Until all practicable steps have been taken to help someone make a decision without success, they cannot be treated as lacking capacity. The consultant did not exhaust all efforts to help Mrs X in her decision making as no interaction took place after she changed her mind. The consultant took it upon himself to make the decision and dismissed Mrs X as an elderly confused patient who does not know her mind.The Mental Capacity dally (2005) has a test for capacity which states that a person lacks capacity if at the material time he is unable to make a decision for himself in relation to the matter because of an deterioration of or a interruption in the functioning of, the mind or brain. It does not matter whether the impairment or disturbance is temporal or permanent (Brammer, 2007). A person is unable to make a decision for himself if he is unable to look the information relevant to the decision, to wi thstand the information, to use or to weigh up that information as part of the process of making the decision, or to underwrite the decision (Brammer 2007). Section 3 of the act states that if the patient can retain information relevant to the decision for a short time only, this does not necessarily mean she cannot make a decision. When Mrs X changed her mind the consultant should have respected this decision because she was capable of retaining information for a while, had thought it through and decided she did not want to proceed.The Mental wellness Act (1983) covers the reception, care and treatment of mentally put outed persons, the repugnment of their property and other related matters. The act empowers authorities to detain those diagnosed with a mental overturn in hospital or police custody and have their disorder assessed or treated against their wishes, known as sectioning. Mrs X was diagnosed as having early signs of Alzheimers disease. This disease is a form of demen tia, a neurologic disease characterized by loss of mental ability severe enough to interfere with recipe activities of daily living. It usually occurs in old age, and is marked by a decline in cognitive functions such as remembering, reasoning, and planning. As Alzheimers disease is a progressive illness with no recovery, it is not applicable to use the Mental Health Act (1983) because whether or not treatment is given for the disease, this will not improve the decision making capacity of Mrs X.The superior general Medical Council clearly stipulates that healthcare professionals ought not to discriminate but should treat those in their care fairly base on their needs. The consultant is going against the GMCs code of conduct when he ignores the patients wish to discontinue with the operation. The GMC emphasises that patients have the right to change their minds on decisions.(ref)Nurses are required by the NMC Code of Conduct to express compassionate attitudes in their careers (Byr ne and Byrne 1992). Nurses act as advocates for patients and as such can be described as special and unique to other health care professionals as they spend more time with the patients (Norman and Ryrie 2004). They are expected to develop a nurse-patient relationship which must be unplowed professional. It is also a nurses duty in accordance with NMC to educate the patient. Mrs X should have been educated and made aware of the advantages and disadvantages of the operation.The principle of non-maleficence is one which seeks to negate intentional harm. Mrs X does not wish to undergo the procedure so to agree with her wish would be harmful although proceeding may harm any existing relationship between the healthcare professionals and the patient. What then happens if for instance the procedure does not go according to plan?Operations to enlighten hip fractures in the elderly are common and to abstain from conducting them would result in a lot of pain and discomfort not to come to th e immobility issue. It is common knowledge that bedridden elderly patients if not travel regularly will develop pressure sores (Onslow 2005). The principle that requires action which benefits the patient is known as beneficence. To effect such an action sometimes medical professionals have to ignore the wishes of the patient if they can prove the patients incapacity to consent. dapple respecting the right of Mrs Xs treatment refusal, capacity test should be done to take chances out if she is capable of making her own decision. If Mrs X lacks capacity, then the medical staff should seek consent from the relatives or Independent advocates (Tingle and Cribb,. 2008).The ethical difficulties are compounded by such cases as the Canadian case of Malette v Schumann. The claimant came to hospital after being involved in a street accident. The doctor went ahead to perform blood transfusion despite the nurse having found a card in her pocket stating that she was a Jehovahs knockout and neve r to be given a blood transfusion. Later, on convalescent the claimant won $20,000 of damages (Tingle and Cribb, 2008). The doctor was charged with battery. Mrs Xs wish not to proceed with the operation may be well founded and give grounds to litigation. The impression of the operation also plays a major part in find out whether the decision to go ahead and operate is a good one or not.On tacking this assignment l learnt that establishing the patients consent is very vital for any action to be justifiable carried out. The consultant did manage to convince Mrs X to agree to undergo the procedure after talk of the town her through it. He unfortunately could not accept her change of mind sighting her age as the problem. I snarl that Mrs X hadnt been given enough time to ponder the idea of undergoing the procedure.She has been admitted to the hospital ward and urgently added to the list. I thought because she was in pain, she was not hypothecateing straight and was pressured into big(p) consent. looking at back l now feel the consultant valued the hip fracture operation to proceed as soon as possible as this would in turn ensure speed recovery. Looking at her age, I would like to think that the earlier she got operated on the faster the recovery. He had the patients interest at heart.At the time l felt team work and better communication would have brought about better decision. The team members should have objected or aired their feelings against the consultants wish to proceed without consent. The corroborative was that if Mrs X was operated on, the pain would easy and she would then be mobile, which would be good for her heart. Taking the age issue into perspective the sooner she underwent the procedure the sooner she was expected to heal. The negative was that if anything went wrong, bearing in mind Mrs X had severe heart problem, the whole team would be in trouble.When Mrs X changed her mind about undergoing the procedure the issue should have been addressed properly since consent is fundamental in a patients care. A meeting between the medical care professionals to look into the reason of change of plan, if need be, a mental capacity test taken as is warranted under the Medical Health Capacity Act. In nursing the interests of the patients always come first. I think communication is vital in nursing.Communication is very important when dealing with patients in nursing. The consultant did not act as a professional when Mrs X changed her mind that she is not ready for the hip operation. I was not comfortable with his response as it sounded harsh, commanding and unprofessional when he was informed of Mrs X decisionI have learnt that team is important in nursing and healthcare professionals should always respect the rights of their patients and consent is at the nucleus of every action.The author has explored the professional, legal and ethical implications of the case study provided. It has been identify that although the NMC p rovides guidance and regulates the nursing profession, the onus is on the practitioner to make decisions based on the guidelines. Although the nurses and doctors may be working together, it has also been noted the both professions are governed by two different bodies and therefore have different codes of ethics although some of the codes could be similar. The NMC code of conduct is often updated as the code sometimes conflicts with other policies and procedures from employment and the law. Nurses should ensure they are up to date with any changes and guidelines within this body (Beech 2007). Because of the trust accorded nurses by cabaret (gained through recognition of nurses expertise) and the right given the profession to regulate practice (professional autonomy) individual clinicians and the profession must be both responsible and accountable Hitchcock et al (2003). The basic ethical principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice and autonomy which are among the ethical pri nciples that influence decisions in health care ethics have been explored and applied to the case study. The Mental Capacity Act (2005) has also been discussed and identified as the main legal instrument relating to this case study. It is crucial that nurses understand how the law influences nursing practice, particularly in relation to anticipating lack of capacity Hindle and Coates (2011).