JL538
Monash University - BMedSc/MD I
* Med applicant *
I personally thought this was a good answer! However i have some questions; not saying that you are wrong, but something for me and maybe others to think about.
Why is it that you assumed he has a phobia of flying? There was nothing in the stem to suggest that. We aren't given much info so I feel like it really could be anything from this man going missing to forgetting the flight and doing somewhere else that day (unlikely, but possible.)
I guess its a question of priorities. Do you prioritise the flight or your concern for John (which you clearly demonstrated in the first sentence, so that was great.)
I am also confused as to how you could talk your actions in a scenario like this without making a whole lot of assumptions - ie, IF he is missing, then I call the police.. Who knows if hes even missing in the first place?
I would assume a phobia of flying because of a couple of reasons:
1. It states I've discussed the pickup time with John so I think personally it is unlikely he would forget - also I paraphrased the prompt but it describes the meeting as a "critical business meeting".
2. The fact that he has not packed at all suggests he never planned to fly anyway - potentially an emergency occured but even so, surely you would have packed before the day of the flight - therefore, it suggests a phobia and deliberate decision to avoid the flight.
3. John did not talk about this flight with her partner - red flag since surely you would talk about leaving home with your partner before you do so.
4. If it is an emergency - even then, I believe you would inform your partner before leaving, or atleast send a text message when you are travelling to the emergency.
This leads me to conclude that John likely has a severe phobia and just wanted to avoid the flight
Edit: For the Jehovah's Witness Q2, I was wondering what people thought of my take:
- Firstly, by definition, yes the doctor lied - deliberately did something they promised they would not do.
- In terms of whether this is acceptable - normally yes.
- If the patient was of legal age - 18 - they would have sufficient mental capacity and competence to make a decision on their health and treatment.
- Therefore, even though the doctor's actions are beneficial - it is unacceptable to breach patient autonomy - a key ethical principle of medicine.
- However, patient is 16 - questionable mental capacity and competence to make such a severe decision - life and death situation here.
- Therefore, I believe the doctor should speak again with the child and explain the severity of the situation clearly - ensure they are making the choice they want to - not pressured by family (who I assume are also Jehovah's Witnesses) in any way.
- Overall, I am undecided due to the younger age of the patient on whether this is acceptable - need more opinions and thought.
Last edited: