BSN Writing Services

BSN Writing Services

Call Us

+1-(612) 234-7670

Our Email

NHS FPX 4000 Assessment 3 Applying Ethical Principles

Student Name

Capella University

NHS-FPX 4000 Developing a Health Care Perspective

Prof. Name


Applying Ethical Principles

Healthcare organizations worldwide deal with various ethical issues. These difficulties range from resource allocation quandaries to ensuring fair access to care, all of which necessitate the use of ethical principles. Ethical dilemmas are one of the issues of ethical principles, in which individuals face conflicting moral principles, making decisions difficult with no clear right or wrong choice. One of the similar case studies is discussed in this assessment. 

The Ethical Case Study – To Vaccinate, or Not?

In this case study, Anna, a newborn at Community Hospital, became the center of an ethical dilemma. Her parents, Jenna and Chris Smith, have decided not to vaccinate their daughter. They quoted the concerns they learned from internet mother blogs about vaccine hazards, including a potential link to autism. Dr. Angela Kerr, Anna’s pediatrician, promotes vaccination, highlighting its proven benefits in preventing disease and protecting public health. Dr. Kerr responds to the Smiths’ worries with scientific facts, highlighting vaccine success in lowering child mortality and disproving the autism-vaccine link.

She also mentions vaccine safety monitoring methods such as the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to comfort the Smiths. Dr. Kerr also discusses herd immunity, highlighting its role in protecting susceptible individuals. Despite her efforts, the Smiths maintained their decision not to vaccinate Anna, presenting a complex ethical dilemma balancing parental autonomy, patient benefits, and public health concerns. It is assumed in this scenario that both sides prioritize their interests while relying on different sources of information and ethical principles, resulting in an ongoing ethical conflict requiring immediate and ethically sound solutions (Capella University, 2023).

Assessment of Facts from the Case Study

The case study’s outcome, revolves around Dr. Kerr’s ethical predicament. She faces a challenging decision, balancing medical expertise with the parents’ preferences. The contentious issue of childhood immunizations, frequently encountered in healthcare settings, arises when parents are hesitant to vaccinate their children, and this stance contradicts established medical research. Vital facts analyzed within the case study include parental vaccine refusal, the availability of misinformation from unreliable online sources, and compelling medical research advocating for vaccination benefits.

Parental Refusal Due to Harmful Effect of Vaccination

The case study showed that the Smiths strongly reject vaccination due to safety concerns that vaccine risks overcome the benefits. They cite increasing autism rates as proof. A study by Khattak et al. (2021) reports vaccine hesitancy as a global issue in more than 90% of countries. In Romania, 11.7% of parents refuse vaccination for their children, while in countries like the UK and USA, the rate has reached 30%.

NHS FPX 4000 Assessment 3 Applying Ethical Principles

Further in the study, it is mentioned that the World Health Organization (WHO) has designated vaccination refusal as one of the top ten global hazards to public health in 2019 (Khattak et al., 2021). Another study by Nurmi et al. (2021) showed that childhood vaccine refusal is driven by concerns over vaccine risks, distrust in healthcare authorities, and reliance on alternative health practices. 

Misinformation About Vaccines

The case study revealed that Smith’s decision is heavily influenced by unverified blogs that spread vaccination disinformation. A study by Larson et al. (2020) highlights the role of social media in polarizing opinions, particularly in individuals’ health-related decisions. This research provides empirical evidence demonstrating misinformation’s substantial influence on Personal health choices. Moreover, it sheds light on the complex ethical challenges healthcare providers face as they strive to advocate for evidence-based practices amid these information dynamics.

Positive Impacts of Vaccines

In the case study, it is presented that Dr. Kerr discussed the advantages of vaccinations, with a specific focus on Measles and Haemophilus Influenzae illnesses. The research unveiled significant discrepancies in vaccination rates, with measles demonstrating relatively high acceptance compared to other vaccines, such as anti-pneumococcal. The study highlights the impact of compulsory vaccination laws on improving coverage and delves into the ethical considerations associated with such mandates.

Overall, the results emphasize the importance of vaccination strategies and health advocacy, with measles vaccination being a noteworthy success (Bertoncello et al., 2021). These resources embrace significance for multiple reasons: a) they provide in-depth perspectives on vaccine hesitancy, b) they present meticulously researched evidence countering unreliable online sources, and c) they strongly emphasize the pivotal role of vaccines in disease prevention, offering a unique standpoint.

Communication Approaches and Their Effectiveness

In this case study,  Dr. Kerr’s communication skills align to help Ana’s parents understand their concerns. She follows the prompting communication approach, allowing the parents to express their concerns and listen to their reasons for refusing vaccination. This strategy was effective as it enabled Dr. Kerr to gain parental trust. Dr. Kerr recognized that vaccinating Ana was the right medical decision but respected the need for parental consent, avoiding potential ethical dilemmas. Through an informed communication approach, she focused on informed decision-making that highlighted the benefits of vaccination, aiming to change the parents’ perspective and ultimately protect Ana’s health.

NHS FPX 4000 Assessment 3 Applying Ethical Principles

A study by Miller et al. (2020) highlighted effective healthcare communication as an effective strategy that should be incorporated into medical practices to build a therapeutic relationship and good rapport with clients. Moreover, Pokhilenko et al. (2021) present that the communication approach of informed decision-making is practical as it provides individuals with complete rights over their health choices, fulfilling medical duties, and conveying essential information. The ineffective approaches of ignorance, imposing treatments without respecting autonomy, and non-verbal communication approaches that give negative impressions to the patients should be avoided. 

Ethical Decision-Making Model                                                                                     

The resource from Capella University (2023) outlines an ethical decision-making model with three main components: moral awareness, judgment, and behavior. This approach is the foundation for ethical committees to formulate and advocate moral decisions. Dr. Kerr expertly negotiated the ethical decision-making model for the Smiths’ vaccine hesitation. She demonstrated acute moral awareness by understanding the conflict between parental autonomy and public health concerns around Ana’s immunization.

After the issue is identified, with the moral judgment component, Dr. Kerr provides research-based information to parents, allowing them to make informed decisions in line with their preferences and understanding. However, while respecting the Smiths’ autonomy, her ethical action stopped short of changing their viewpoint, leaving the ethical quandary unresolved. This illustrates how healthcare practitioners navigate complicated ethical quandaries to prioritize patient well-being and public health.

Effective use of ethical approaches allows for the rapid identification of issues and formulation of morally sound and patient-centered decisions. On the other hand, ineffective practices can hurt individuals and communities because they lack ethical concerns and educated decision-making. In healthcare decision-making, emphasizing effective ways preserves ethical standards and Prioritizes patient well-being (Luca Casali et al., 2020). This demonstrates the significance of ethical approaches in healthcare decision-making.

Ethical Solution to the Proposed Case Study

One of the ethical solutions based on autonomy (informed choices) and beneficence (Ana’s benefit for future schooling) is to involve a social service agency that would accompany Dr. Kerr in counseling and assisting Ana’s family. Professionals from these agencies should be involved to guide the family about the potential difficulties that may arise, such as the prohibited admission policy for unvaccinated children in various schools (Goyal et al., 2022).

Additionally, prompting the concept of herd immunity through educational programs for families can strike a balance between individual rights (parental autonomy) and the greater societal good (community justice). Herd immunity is described as when vaccinated individuals can shield those community members who, for various reasons, can not be vaccinated within the particular community (McDermott, 2021). Educating about this concept through data analytics would develop insight for the parents and may help in changing their minds. These ideas provide ethical frameworks for navigating the vaccine quandary while putting the welfare of the patient and the larger community first.


Vaccination rejection is a global ethical challenge requiring healthcare institutions to develop extensive educational campaigns for medical practitioners. These programs should give medical professionals the expertise and communication skills they need to engage with concerned families effectively. Furthermore, continued research into evidence-based strategies is required to tackle misinformation. Encouraging informed decision-making among parents will allow healthcare organizations to promote vaccination and preserve public health effectively.


Bertoncello, C., Nicolli, A., Maso, S., Fonzo, M., Crivellaro, M., Mason, P., & Trevisan, A. (2021). Uptake of non-mandatory vaccinations in future physicians in Italy. Vaccines, 9(9), 1035.

Capella University (2023). Ethical Case Studies. Capella Library Online.

Capella University (2023). Ethical Decision-Making Model. Capella Library Online.

Goyal, K., & Dosajh, K. (2022). Regulating vaccination: a comparative study. Infectious diseases: News, opinions, training, 11(2), 14–18.  

Khattak, F. A., Rehman, K., Shahzad, M., Arif, N., Ullah, N., Kibria, Z., Arshad, M., Afaq, S., Ibrahimzai, A. K., & Haq, Z. ul. (2021).

Prevalence of parental refusal rate and its associated factors in routine immunization by using WHO vaccine hesitancy tool: A Cross-sectional study at district Bannu, KP, Pakistan. International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 104, 117–124.  

Larson, H. J., Lin, L., & Goble, R. (2022). Vaccines and the social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis, 42(7).  

Luca Casali, G., & Perano, M. (2020). Forty years of research on factors influencing ethical decision making: Establishing a future research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 132, 614–630.  

NHS FPX 4000 Assessment 3 Applying Ethical Principles

McDermott, A. (2021). Core Concept: Herd immunity is an important—and often misunderstood—public health phenomenon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(21), e2107692118. 

Miller, T. A., & M. Robin DiMatteo. (2020). Physician–patient communication. Wiley Online Library.  

Nurmi, J., & Harman, B. (2021). Why do parents refuse childhood vaccination? Reasons reported in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 50(4), 140349482110043.  Pokhilenko, I., van Esch, T. E. M., Brabers, A. E. M., & de Jong, J. D. (2021). Relationship between trust and patient involvement in medical decision-making: A cross-sectional study. PLOS ONE, 16(8), e0256698.