Final answer:
Robert Schwartz and Gabriel Bosslet focus on medical futility ambiguity, a concept tied to ethical healthcare decision-making, especially regarding end-of-life care. Autonomy and beneficence are key principles that guide these decisions, and care ethics suggests a collective approach to resolving healthcare conflicts.
Step-by-step explanation:
Robert Schwartz and Gabriel Bosslet's work primarily addresses medical futility ambiguity within healthcare. This term refers to situations where medical interventions may no longer benefit the patient, leading to difficult ethical and decision-making challenges for both healthcare providers and families. Decisions surrounding patients declared brain dead demonstrate the complexities of these issues, as modern medicine advances bring forth ethical concerns our ancestors did not face, especially in terms of end-of-life care.
Discussions about critical healthcare decisions involve principles like autonomy and beneficence. Autonomy grants patients the right to make healthcare decisions for themselves, while beneficence focuses on actions that benefit others. These principles often come into play when considering policies around treatment costs, patient quality of life, and privacy risks.
In the context of dealing with diseases such as MRSA, ethical questions emerge about patients' rights to decline testing or treatment and the implications of such choices on the healthcare system and other patients. The fee-for-service model, Moral hazard, Adverse selection, Medicare, Medicaid, and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA or Obamacare) are all factors that impact decision-making in healthcare. Care ethics, emphasizing compassion, sympathy, and responsibility, encourages a collective decision-making process that takes into account all stakeholders' viewpoints.