Case 1 Outline
1. A child is seen by a general practioner in an office setting for flu like symptoms. The child removes his shirt upon request to reveal bruises on his torso. The mother is questioned about the bruises, she explains they are from a procedure known as “cao gio”, also referred to as “coining”. This procedure is done to raise bad blood and improve circulation. This is done by rubbing warm oils or gels on a person’s skin with a coin or flat metal object. When the stethoscope touches his skin, he winces with pain. The question is, should the mother be reported to Child Protective Services?

2. Ethical issue identified is the Right Approach.

3. Facts of Case# 1
A. Child has flu symptoms
B. Child has bruises
C. Child is …show more content…
Whether in this situation the Dr is truly insensitive or not is not for him to decide. Respect to the individual and family being treated is what’s seen. Harshness and seemingly negative tones are seen with wider eyes than, mutual respect and cohesive communication. The virtue approach allows for out of the box thinking in an environment that is continuously changing. As providers in the medical field our decision making must adapt to ideas and morals that are different from our own. Inviting the patient or their care giver to be included and to have a voice is a humanitarian thing to do. Our culture is different from theirs and when a patient steps outside their norms and asks for help that must be seen as an open door to work together.

Case 2 Outline
1. A child is seen in the emergency room due to an asthma attack. Two weeks later the child returns to the emergency room for another attack. The child has both parents and they both work. Their child is not eligible for state or federal aid since his parents’ income exceeded qualifications and they cannot afford to pay for insurance, they don’t have insurance either. Question is, what should be done?

2. This scenario represents the Common Goods Approach

3. Case 2 Facts
A. Child has asthma
B. The parents are