Accepting a patient's decision

Last month, I wrote about recent instances of racism, the Black Lives Matter movement, and my own connection to it all, which is deeply personal to me. I have also written previously about my experience of paramedic care provided to my mother at the end of her life. From a traditional perspective, this personal approach could be seen as unprofessional; but from a contemporary perspective, we are required to bring our authentic selves to our roles in order to connect with one another in a genuine way—and nowhere is this truer than in the provision of patient healthcare.

Being authentic in healthcare is essential in bringing the ‘human touch’ to the patient experience, which is integral to a compassionate, patient-centred care approach. However, with authenticity comes the potential for ethical dilemmas, not only concerning appropriate professional boundaries for example, but also where paramedics' values and beliefs may differ from those of the patient. What happens when it is deemed that a patient requires a blood transfusion for a bleeding ulcer, but refuses any blood products—even if the consequence is her death—because she is a Jehovah's witness and the transfusion would conflict with her religious beliefs? In this month's issue (p. 304), Emma Moore delves into a case study about patient autonomy and what happens when it conflicts with a paramedic's professional autonomy to make critical decisions in an emergency and provide life-saving care.