UPI Study › Courses › Healthcare Organization and Management › Free lessons › Lesson 3.3 Free with a free account
Ethics of Life, Death, and Healthcare Financing
Healthcare Organization and Management · Chapter 3: Ethical Dimensions of Healthcare PracticeSection 3.3 · lesson 15 of 10511 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Healthcare Organization and Management.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Healthcare Organization and Management
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Ethics and Law in Health Informatics and Data Privacy →← Ethics in Mental Health Care and Critical Care NursingNext lesson: Ethics and Law in Health Informatics and Data Privacy →
In this lesson
Goals of care, surrogate standards, futility, and fair allocation of resources.
- Explain why goals of care should guide end-of-life treatment decisions
- Distinguish substituted judgment from the best interests standard
- Describe a fair process for futility disputes and the role of palliative care
- Compare utilitarian, egalitarian, and priority-to-the-worst-off allocation frameworks
Free study notes
Get this lesson's notes by email
The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,430 words). Read along, or search it.
Opening Case
One Treatment Question per Shift
Joe Halvorsen's wife, Marit, is critically ill in Larkfield's ICU, and she can no longer speak for herself. For three days, a different clinician has stopped by each shift with a different yes-or-no question about one more treatment. Joe is worn out. He doesn't know what Marit would say about each one. He asks Dr. Hannah Weiss, the chief medical officer, what he's supposed to do. Is Joe being asked the right question at all?
Goals of Care
From Single Treatments to Patient Goals
Hannah explains that the question has shifted over the decades. The older question took treatments one at a time: should we use this one? That has two weaknesses. It defaults to yes, because declining feels like withholding. And a string of small choices can add up to care that, as a whole, nobody would have chosen. The current question is about goals of care: what is the care trying to achieve, for this person, now? Recovery to some level, more time, comfort, being home, being present for an event. Once goals are stated, each decision is answerable: a treatment fits if it serves them. Most patients have no view on one treatment, but a clear view of what they hope for. So Larkfield schedules these conversations early, with a senior clinician, in private, and records them where the next team will find them.
Advance Directives
Moving Authority While Keeping Patient Values
Samuel Ndiaye, Larkfield's counsel, checks Marit's file. Advance directives, living wills, and durable powers of attorney all do the same thing. Each moves decision authority from a person who can't use it to another person, or to an earlier statement, so the patient's own values still govern. Federal law, the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990, requires hospitals in Medicare and Medicaid to tell adult patients about their right to make advance directives. Each has a limit. A written directive addresses the situations its writer imagined. An appointed agent can respond to the real situation, but may not know the patient's wishes in it. Most failures are organizational: a directive nobody can find, one set aside because it came from another state, or one filed at admission and never shown to the team deciding.
Surrogate Standards
Substituted Judgment Before Best Interests
Marit has no directive, so Joe is her surrogate. Hannah explains the two standards he might use. Substituted judgment asks him to decide as Marit would have, from her values, her past statements, and her choices. It comes first, because it preserves her autonomy. The question isn't what Joe would choose. It's what Marit would have chosen. Best interests applies only when the patient's wishes are truly unknown. It asks what would best serve her, weighing benefit and burden as she would experience them. Two errors recur: using best interests when nobody asked what she'd said, and claiming substituted judgment with nothing behind it. The safeguard: record what's known, and its source.
Withholding and Withdrawing
No Ethical Difference, Real Emotional Weight
At the ICU team meeting, Grace Okafor raises something staff find hard: stopping a treatment that's already begun. Mainstream ethics treats withholding and withdrawing as equivalent. The AMA's Code of Medical Ethics says there may be an emotional difference, but no ethical one. The practical reason is strong. If starting committed you to continuing, clinicians would avoid trying treatments whose benefit is uncertain, and some patients would lose a fair trial. The counter-argument deserves its full weight: withdrawing is a deliberate act, and many people experience it differently from never starting. So Hannah doesn't restate the argument. Staff who find a withdrawal distressing aren't confused. They need support.
Quick Check
An Estranged Brother as Surrogate
Quick check. A woman arrives unconscious, with no directive. Her only relative is a brother she hasn't spoken to in twenty years. He knows nothing about her views or values. Which standard should guide decisions for her? Pause, and decide. Best interests. There's nothing to base substituted judgment on, so the decision turns on benefit and burden as she would experience them. Substituted judgment is tempting, because it ranks first. But it needs evidence of her wishes, and claiming it without any is one of the two classic errors.
Futility Disputes
Facts, Values, and a Fair Process
Sometimes a team believes a treatment can't achieve its purpose, while a family asks that it continue. That's called a futility dispute. The word hides two claims. One is factual: the treatment can't produce its effect. The other is about values: the effect isn't worth having, and there the patient's view is central. So no health organization should settle these by clinical say-so. The process: agree on the facts, with a second opinion. Then ethics consultation, and review by a body independent of the team. Offer to transfer care to a willing provider, give the family notice and time, and record every step. Several states set rules for this, so the local procedure governs.
Palliative Care
Comfort Care Alongside Treatment
Hannah also brings up palliative care: care that relieves symptoms and stress and supports quality of life in serious illness. It can run alongside treatment aimed at the illness. Hospice is a model of care for people nearing the end of life, built around comfort and family support. Under Medicare, a physician certifies a prognosis of six months or less. Presenting palliative care as the step after treatment creates a false choice. And late referral is an organizational pattern, tied to when goals conversations happen.
Financial Assistance
What Hospitals Owe Patients Who Cannot Pay
Ethics also reaches the bill. Federal law already requires emergency screening, but what does a hospital owe a patient who needs non-emergency care and can't pay? Tax-exempt hospitals must have a written financial assistance policy, limits on what eligible patients are charged, and rules for billing and collections. Beyond the law, Tom Brennan, the CFO, and Helen Wu, the CEO, weigh three positions. Mission: a charity owes care its community can't get elsewhere. Sustainability: a hospital owes its community survival, and losses beyond a point close it. Fairness: whatever is given must be given consistently. Fairness is the one managers control most. The test isn't the amount granted, but whether two similar patients get the same answer, and whether collections check eligibility first.
Allocation Frameworks
Utilitarian, Egalitarian, and Worst-Off Priority
Then a harder allocation. Larkfield's new post-ICU recovery clinic has room for only about half the patients who qualify. A utilitarian framework allocates for the greatest total benefit. The objection: it disadvantages people whose possible gain is smaller for reasons beyond their control. An egalitarian framework treats people equally: equal shares, or equal chances, like a lottery or first come, first served. The objection: it ignores real differences in need. Priority to the worst off directs care to those in greatest need. The objection: it can spend large resources on small gains, and someone must judge who counts as worst off. Each objection is the direct cost of its rule, so no framework avoids all three.
Quick Check
Home Visits for the Neediest Families
Quick check. A rural health department has fewer home-visit slots than eligible families. It fills them first with the families who have the lowest incomes and the poorest health. Which framework is it using? Pause, and decide. Priority to the worst off. The slots go to those in greatest need, even if other families might gain more from each visit. Greatest total benefit is tempting, since the visits do help. But that rule would ask where each slot produces the most benefit, not who is worst off.
Rationing
Explicit Criteria Beat Hidden Rationing
Every health system rations, because none funds unlimited care. The question is how. Explicit rationing uses stated criteria, applied in the open. Implicit rationing works through waiting lists, hard-to-get appointments, distance, and unrecorded judgments under pressure. Implicit rationing is more comfortable, and worse. Nobody decided, so nobody can be asked why. Similar patients get different outcomes. And it rewards those best able to navigate the system. So Helen's clinic rule is explicit. A stated share goes to patients with no other option in the region; the rest goes by expected benefit. Ability to pay and insurance don't count. The criteria are published, applied consistently, and reviewable, and the record names what was given up: some total benefit, on purpose.
Case Resolution
Marit Wanted to Get Home
Back to Joe. Hannah stops asking about single treatments, and asks what Marit was hoping for. Joe remembers right away. She wanted to get home to her garden, and she'd said she never wanted to live long-term on machines. Now the team has goals, and every decision can be measured against them. A palliative care team joins the conversation that afternoon, alongside her ICU care.
Key Takeaways
Goals, Standards, and Explicit Allocation
To recap. Goals of care organize end-of-life decisions, instead of one treatment at a time. Directives and agents move authority so the patient's own values still govern. Substituted judgment comes first; best interests applies only when wishes are unknown. Futility disputes go through a fair, independent process, never clinical say-so. And allocate explicitly, by stated criteria, naming what you gave up.
About Healthcare Organization and Management at UPI Study
Healthcare Organization and Management (Health 302) is a self-paced online course of 105 video lessons in 18 chapters, from health systems and the law to ethics, leadership, teams, strategy, informatics, finance, quality, human resources, marketing and evidence-based practice. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Health courses Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Healthcare Organization and Management with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Healthcare Organization and Management carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Ethics of Life, Death, and Healthcare Financing
What is the difference between substituted judgment and best interests?
Is withdrawing life support ethically different from never starting it?
What is the difference between palliative care and hospice?
What is the difference between explicit and implicit rationing in health care?
About the Healthcare Organization and Management course
How many college credits is Healthcare Organization and Management?
How much does Healthcare Organization and Management cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Healthcare Organization and Management take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Healthcare Organization and Management.
105 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →