Table of ContentsTheories of Medical EthicsConfidentialityCode of Medical EthicsMedical Ethics under the Medical Council ActLegal thought, philosophy and ethics of ancient India are are developed with rational synthesis and continuous new concepts. The foundation of ethics comes from the Hindu belief that we are all part of the divine Paramatman. Ayurveda is the ancient science of life. It sets out the principles of health and disease management and the code of conduct for doctors. Charaka described the goal of medicine as twofold: to preserve good health and to fight disease. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"? Get an original essay Charaka's humanist ideal is unquestionable in his advice to the doctor. Those who practice not for money or whim, but out of compassion for living beings, are the best among all doctors. It is difficult to find a factor of religious blessing comparable to that of the doctor who takes the traps of death for his patients. The doctor, who considers compassion for living beings to be the highest religion, fulfills his mission and achieves the greatest happiness. Justice Brace Jennings observed that moral decision-making in medicine is increasingly institutionalized and subject to formalized procedures and boundaries in various fields. of contemporary medicine, such as human research, organ harvesting and transplantation, assisted reproduction, health care rationing and forgoing life-sustaining treatments. Medical ethics is a field that separates a legal obligation from a moral obligation, and relationships require the trust of medical fiduciary duty to one's patient. The reasons for the need for confidentiality are complementary. First, if patients do not trust doctors to treat the information they disclose confidentially, they will not seek treatment. This is particularly important in the case of an infectious disease, such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The doctor must also believe that patients have a complete history of their illness; otherwise, risks may arise because the doctor may misdiagnose and prescribe inappropriate treatment. The legal obligation is not absolute and may be modified. The case analysis which makes it possible to define and delimit the right in this area demonstrates the importance for the patient to disclose all information concerning him in the public interest. The private interest of the individual is relatively unimportant. The law is linked to medical law and medical ethics. Morality is sometimes explicitly included in legal doctrine and is inevitably incorporated into the law in controversial ethical issues raised by the health care system. Medical law is inextricably linked to medical ethics. We will not be able to understand medical law without understanding the ethical tensions in medicine. Theories of Medical Ethics Moral Realism, Moral Objectivism, and Moral Pluralism Moral relativism is the view that what is morally right or wrong depends on what a person thinks. Now this can either be subjective, i.e. what is morally right or wrong for someone depends on what one considers morally right or wrong or conventional, i.e. What is morally right or wrong is based on what the society we live in thinks. as the conventions of society affect it. Moral facts may vary from society to society. Moral objectivism is the idea that what is rightor evil does not depend on what each person thinks is good or evil. In other words, on this view, moral facts are like physical facts, since facts do not depend on what anyone thinks. Moral pluralism is the idea that there can be conflicting moral views and that they should all be respected. Moral pluralists tend to be open to competing positions. They analyze issues from multiple moral perspectives before deciding and acting. This theory believes that many moral issues are extremely complicated. Therefore, no philosophical approach will always provide all the answers.UtilitarianismUtilitarianism is a set of moral theories that are morally necessary to find the best possible balance between usefulness and uselessness. Classical or hedonistic utilitarianism is the most famous version which requires the pursuit of maximum pleasure rather than pain. See Gandyour and Lauterbach 2003 for a brief summary of many popular versions of utilitarianism. For example, there is a doctor who is faced with a number of cases where four patients need organ and tissue donation to save their lives and there is one person who has the potential to donate organs and tissues, from which these tissues can be removed relatively safely, but it is not desirable to do so. For an act of utilitarianism aimed at maximizing the utility and ability to remove certain tissues (such as a single kidney, a liver segment, bone marrow and blood) to save the lives of these four patients who will be described on the inclusive utilitarian balance of this approach. The utility of saving four patients will likely be very great, especially if those patients contribute to the lives of others. High enough that, in certain circumstances, one can assess the uselessness of resorting to a reluctant donor. This commitment to equality means that utilitarianism is associated with the phrase “greatest benefit for the greatest number.” Right-based theory and duty-based theory Right-based and duty-based theories are based on the interest of the individual and not the collective. It follows that, unlike many versions of utilitarianism, when all else is equal, the combined moral claims of large numbers of people in need of warts removal cannot prevail. on the claims of a person who is dying of heart disease. and duty-based theories rely on the possibility of benefiting from moral obligations. Rights-based theory states that all moral obligations are limited to moral rights, which are understood as legitimate claims that impose correlative rights from which the right holder can benefit. On the other hand, rights-based theories do not automatically impose an obligation on the beneficiary to relinquish his or her benefit in the sense of releasing the obligation holder from his or her obligation. Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics rejects any action based on moral principles, including utilitarian rights. Theories of character values ​​based on oughts and oughts. Even so, virtue ethics is not intended to provide universal rules or principles, such as the principles of utility (the goal is not to maximize virtuous behavior) or those associated with theories and rights-based theories. a set of moral positions that draw elements from the other four. These positions are rarely well-founded and tend to approximate the ethical considerations of a layman. It is essentially a diverse category that covers countless moral positions that are not all consistent. The positionclassic compromise in medical ethics is illustrated in the “principle” of Beauchmp and Childress. These two authors represent four principles of biomedical ethics. Their position explicitly seeks a compromise between an overall deep moral theory and practical ethics by adopting an element of utilitarianism, a theory based on rights and duties, and virtue ethics. Informed consent It is commonly believed that patients cannot make rational choices because they cannot evaluate the intricacies of alternative medical treatments, procedures, or drug trials, and therefore often have a paternalistic view that "the doctor knows better.” On the contrary, determining what should be done with one's own body is everyone's right. A surgeon who performs a surgical procedure without the consent of his patient commits an act of aggression towards him for which he is responsible. What is the ancient teaching on the subject?circumstances? Charaka recommends that doctors gain the trust of relatives, community elders and even government officials before beginning treatment that could result in the patient's death. The doctor must then proceed with the treatment. In India, the doctor enjoys great reliability, but nowadays more and more people are questioning this practice. Trust, based on the goodness of doctors, is slowly disappearing and giving way to the idea that decision-making is the patient's right. Patient consent is important in this context. Disclosure of Information People argue with a doctor who, by disclosing information, is violating his duty of secrecy. In this context, the patient would have the right to know what information and how much information is disclosed and to whom it has been revealed. Information disclosure is therefore another area of ​​concern for medical ethics, and information disclosure also creates conflicts. But there may be certain circumstances in which a doctor must disclose the information, for example to parents, the insurance company, the police, etc. According to Charaka and Susrata, the doctor must exercise caution in exposing the patient to the incurable nature of his illness. . This should not be said openly or bluntly. This may shock the patient and it is best to inform their loved ones. Heroic treatment can only be carried out with the consent of the patient's relatives. Today's doctors have different opinions on when to tell the truth and what to say to the dying patient. There are many conflicting interests such as the patient's right to know their condition and the benefit to the patient and possible harm related to the situation. Confidentiality The rules of confidentiality and medical ethics are decided by health professionals through their control of professional associations. Historically, the Hipporatic Oath constitutes the foundation of the medical profession. The policy that governs the GMC follows from this, and this is why the oath binds the doctor at least theoretically. The GMC attaches great importance to professional secrecy, but before going into detail, it is worth mentioning two terms of the Hippocratic Oath. First, the confidential relationship is not limited to what happens between the patient and the doctor. The doctor must maintain trust even when it is an informal conversation, regardless of the source of this information. Patient autonomyThe patient's expectations are that everything that is told about his illness is part of the ethical concept of autonomy or self-determination. . At the same time, it is generally recognized that the right to behave independentlycan sometimes be ignored due to the interests of others. There is no independent right to kill someone, even if they make an autonomous decision to do so, because the good of society requires that this behavior be prohibited. Respect for autonomy is one of the cornerstones of the relationship between doctor and patient. The professional ethics of physicians require that they leverage their expertise as well as the patient's right to self-determination in their own mind, and, on the whole, physicians will take this commitment very seriously, even in cases where the capacity of the patient may be in doubt. Both ethically and practically, the autonomous patient is the ideal model from the point of view of doctors and patients. Organ transplantation. There is a growing demand for organ transplants such as kidneys, and these demands often lead to ethical nightmares. A small number of kidneys are donated by relatives and the vast majority of transplants are carried out on a commercial basis. Some doctors are involved in the kidney trade and treat wealthy patients in India and the Middle East. A new class of agents is actively involved as intermediaries. Some doctors do not care about ethical values ​​and steal kidneys without the knowledge or consent of the person concerned. The illiterate and downtrodden are forced to donate their kidneys due to desperate need for money. This type of organ transplantation raises many ethical questions that must be addressed. Terminally ill A doctor preserves human life and prevents death. As long as the patient is breathing, it is the doctor's duty to offer treatment (tatvat pratikriya karya yavae chvasiti manavah). The terminally ill patient must be treated with care to reduce their suffering. Current thinking is part of this perspective and does not favor the prolongation of life with machines when there is no chance of recovery.Code of medical ethicsThe Code of medical ethics aims to preserve ethics medical doctors. The main objective of the medical profession is to serve humanity. Professionals must act according to their ideals. He must be noble in character and must be modest, sober, patient and ready to perform all his duty without fear, with prudence in his profession and in all acts of life. The code specifies the responsibilities of doctors. The primary purpose of the medical profession is to serve humanity. Physicians must be available to their patients and colleagues and receive the benefits of their professional skills. The physician must use a science-based remedy and is not permitted to communicate professionally with anyone who violates this policy. The honored ideals of the medical profession include the responsibility of physicians, which extends not only to individuals but also to society. The Code established guidelines for payment for services. Payment for services must be in accordance with the form and the prescribed amount must be expressly communicated to the patient at the time of service. It is unethical for doctors to follow an unpaid service without care. Commitment to patients listed in the Code. A physician is not required to care for all people in need, except in cases of emergency to humanity and the noble traditions of the profession. He must not neglect the calls of the sick and wounded, but must responsibly attend to his mission. The Code guarantees the confidentiality, patience and sensitivity of the doctor. Details about patients' individual lives should not be disclosed unless required by law. A physician may determine whether his or her duty requires disclosure of.