Read the Mother Courage article and the DIY scientist articles. What major ethical error did a doctor make in the Mother Courage article? How do you attribute the difference in insight between this doctor and that shown by Jill Viles?
Write your answers as a reply in the comments section
A major ethical error that a doctor made in the Mother Courage article was by expressing their own opinions. The doctor insisted that Furlong’s two sons were just going to die; that there was no hope. Also, the doctor harassed Furlong by making her feel ashamed and stating that she should not have had a second child because she should have known about the genetic condition. It was also unethical of the doctor to state that this disease runs in her family and that she was a carrier without actually knowing that fact. It was very rude and insensitive of the doctor to state that she should have had aborted the second child.
In Jill Viles’ case, Jill was experiencing the condition herself. She wanted to learn more about it and about her family history. She did her own research and became knowledgeable about her condition. Jill was able to find the answers she was looking for by doing her own research. The doctor in the Mother Courage Article did not care to look more into the disease or help with treatment options; all the doctor wanted to do was give a diagnosis and that was it. The doctor was adamant that there was no hope of a good life for the two kids. Whilst Jill wanted to live a good life with her condition and she was very motivated to do so.
In both of the articles, the patients were showing symptoms of different genetic disorders. They went to see their primary doctors, but they were given a green flag and told everything was normal. However, the patients and their families knew this wasn’t the case, so both families went to a different doctor. Furlong took her sons to several doctors over several years until finally they were diagnosed with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Viles’ parents took her to a plethora of doctors and went to the Mayo Clinic for summers on end with the same result, “there was nothing they could do.” The ethical error in these stories were that the primary doctors used their own knowledge and opinions to diagnose the patients without actually running tests. By doing this, the doctors were unfair to the patients and took away some of their hope. Furlong’s doctor told her that her boys would die young and there was nothing she could do about it. Viles’ doctor was stumped at her condition and said that they couldn’t do anything about it. However, the difference between Furlong’s doctor and Viles’ doctor is that Viles’ doctor referred her to another hospital that might be able to help her. Furlong’s doctor basically said your boys are going to die, so love them and deal with it. He didn’t even try to help very much. In his defense though, Duchenne muscular dystrophy was being thrown into the corner and not set as a top priority by research centers due to its rareness. Furlong’s doctor probably told her was he was taught. Although he could’ve given the family a little more hope and at least tried other treatments. In the end, both families were given curve balls when they were told nothing could be done to help by their doctors. One family was referred to another clinic while the other family fought for their lives without much help from medical professionals. Both stories tell the tales of victims of muscular dystrophy and how they and their families continued their quests to find a cure.
In the Mother Courage article, the doctor made multiple ethical errors with the choice of words and opinions he threw at the mother who was just learning the diagnosis of her two young sons. I know hearing that there was nothing to be done but to watch her children’s health decline over the years was very heartbreaking and then to follow up and tell the mother that she should’ve aborted her already born child was a very unprofessional statement. It also didn’t help that he verbally attacked her and told her she should’ve known about things she clearly was clueless about. In the DIY Scientist article Jill Viles was completely different than the doctor in Mother Courage, with little knowledge to her situation she self taught herself by researching over time and gathering information. She didn’t take “we don’t know” as an answer and she didn’t give up on herself just like Furlong didn’t give up on her sons suffering from Duchenne’s.
In both articles, journalists tell a story of young women who undertake a heroic journey to save their offspring or get answers about their genetic makeup. In “Mother Courage A family tragedy and a scientific crusade,” the mother refuses to accept that her children will die and launches a successful campaign to fund research into muscular dystrophy. The physician who diagnosed the children, a neurologist, told the mother that her children would die. Although it may have been done poorly, this is not an ethical breach; too many medical professionals commit the ethical error of lying to family about a patient’s condition when they should be honest about the fragility of life.
An ethical breach did occur when the neurologist, as the mother recalls, shamed her for having a second child and told her she should have terminated the pregnancy. This statement reflects a personal viewpoint not backed by statistics or scientific data and involves a gray area in society related to the stigma of abortion. When a person is in a fragile emotional state, the last thing they want to hear is “you should have known better.” To be a physician is to know a patient’s suffering and feel that weight on your shoulder; the physician only knows the child’s suffering. While the mother, oblivious to the enormity of the diagnosis, hears and sees only the death of the hopes and dreams for her beloved child’s future.
In “The DIY Scientist, the Olympian, and the Mutated Gene,” a brilliant individual seeks answers for her and her family’s appearance, leading her to a diagnosis. Her determination to explain her symptoms despite the medical community disregarding her should be a lesson to future clinicians.
The ethical errors the doctor had made in the Mother Courage article are not taking her thought into concern and not compassioning with parents with disabled children. Accordingly, the doctor immediately blamed her for having the second child and did not want to listen to her. In Jill Viles’s case, doctors had done the same. It was clear when Jill met the neurologist in Des Moines and asked her to see her paper. Then, the neurologist disapproved of her believes and negated her paper (paragraph 31). In both cases, the doctors were not willing to receive different thoughts and had not empathized with them.
The major ethical errors the doctor in “Mother Courage” made was by accusing Pat Furlong of having family history of the disease as well as shaming her for having a second son and pushing their opinion that the pregnancy should have been prevented or aborted. The doctor did not ask if Pat had a family history of the disease, and only assumed she did because of Pat’s older son, who also had it. At that point the Furlongs did not realize that they had Duchenne, only that something was wrong and she needed help.
The difference in insight between the doctor in “Mother Courage” and “DIY Scientist” is that the doctors in “DIY Scientist” had no idea what kind of disease they were looking at, only that something was wrong. The doctor in “Mother Courage” knew all about Duchenne and let his opinions be known to his patients and their parents, while the doctors in “DIY Scientist” had no medical knowledge of a disease that affected women the way it was for Jill, so they could not give any help or opinions. When Jill was older and began researching her disease, the doctors were skeptical to accept self-diagnosis from a patient even though they will most likely know their symptoms better than a doctor could.
One major ethical error a doctor made in the “Mother Courage” article was the doctor assuming Pat had a family history of Duchenne and deciding to scold and berate her for choosing to have children. Similarly, the article opened with doctors dismissing her claims that there was something wrong with her children when in reality she was correct and there were legitimate issues doctors either overlooked or were unable to diagnose until the children grew older. Both situations were caused by doctors acting dismissively towards their patient’s mother. In the other article, “The DIY Scientist”, Jill Viles acts much differently from the aforementioned doctor. For instance, Jill is willing to learn new things and is always ready to investigate possibilities even if the chances seem extremely low. When Jill first learns about Emery Dreifuss she reads that it can only occur in males, yet, she is willing to advocate for herself and get tested. Compared to the doctor, Jill is much more receptive to new ideas and is willing to test them, rather than making assumptions or acting dismissively.
The major ethical error made by the doctor in the Mother Courage article is when they claimed that there was nothing to be done for Furlong’s children. They used their opinions to make the choice, which was not the best decision as it threw both Furlong and her husband into mass hysteria. In addition, there was definitely a greater effort that could have been made by the doctor opposed to only telling Furlong that her children will die. While this doctor used their opinion supported by weakened assumptions, Jill Viles’ efforts were different. She dove deeper into the issue because she desired to make a change, opposed to this doctor in the Mother Courage article who merely “accepted the facts”. As a result of this effort, Jill was able to become more successful in her findings due to her never ending thirst for knowledge.
In the article “Mother Courage” there were multiple major ethical errors being made. The doctors in this article told Pat Furlong that there was nothing they could do to help her sons, they dismissed her concerns of her sons being delayed in motor skills and slipping through her arms. The doctor threw the wrong choice of words to her and insisted there was no hope for her sons, and that they were going to die. It was hard for Furlong as a mother to see her sons declining, especially because she knew that there was something deeply wrong with them. Furlong even raised her concerns about her sons to her husband Tom, which he dismissed.“For me, it was a feeling in my stomach that something was wrong,’ she claims. It was also very unprofessional and heartbreaking at how the doctors knew she was suffering in this situation as a mother, yet poorly handled the situation and told her to deal with it. The ethical error was telling Pat that she should’ve had an abortion and shamed her for having a second child. The doctors didn’t give her any hope and only gave her the information of what they were taught and knew how to handle. In the article “The DIY scientist, the Olympian, and the Mutated Gene” is a similar story to Mother Courage. The doctors had no idea what kind of disease they were working with, but they knew something was wrong. The differences in the articles is that she self-diagnosed herself with information that she had learned herself, and the doctors weren’t quick to agree with self-diagnoses. It was terrifying for Jill because the doctors were really sure they had never seen anything like this, they couldn’t define what it was. They appreciated their honesty but it was terrifying they couldn’t grasp what it was. Jill didn’t want to take the doctor’s answers and leave the situation alone, she knew she couldn’t give up until she got answers for herself. Overall, one of these articles dealt with being sent to different clinics to find answers and one was forced to deal with having no answers.
The major ethical error that jumped out at me was built on a scientific error. The doctor’s scientific error was in assuming that the Jill Viles must have been aware of this genetic disorder in her family. It seems the doctor was ignorant of the fact that a third of cases result from spontaneous mutations. From there, his glaring ethical error was in projecting blame for the boys’ disorder on their mother, even going so far as to suggest that she could have aborted their pregnancies.
Besides the doctor’s deficiency in ethics, compassion, and social skills, I attribute the difference between his insight and Viles’ as that of intellectual curiosity. Viles faced the problem wanting to know how it could have happened. The doctor, on the other hand, assumed the disorder must be the mother’s fault because he did not believe that it wasn’t in her family and wasn’t curious enough to consider alternative explanations.
In the Mother Courage article a mother goes on a search to find help for her sons. When her kids were young, their mother noticed that they were a little more droopy than other children. She knew something was wrong with her children and she set out to find help. Doctors constantly told her nothing was wrong and they were just fine. This was an ethical error on their part. The doctors are not the ones always around the children. They won’t know for sure that nothing is wrong with the kids if they don’t see them in everyday life. After many tests and doctors, Furlong finally figured out that her boys had Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. The doctor told her there was no hope for the children and there was nothing that could be done to help them. He told Furlong it was a genetic disease and she should not have had her second son. This was another ethical error because in this case, it was not genetic. Another error was his statement about there being nothing that can be done. The disease was not affecting him personally, and he didn’t have a good understanding of the kids and their parents. This is different from Jill’s circumstance because she was dealing with her disease personally. She had an understanding that something was wrong. Nobody else believed her but she knew. So she set to find what was wrong with her and she did.
A major ethical problem that occurred in the Mother Courage article was the fact that the doctors simply refused to run tests, instead relying on their own opinions. While the doctor’s opinions are valid, they should always be backed up by evidence obtained through testing to ensure that nothing is missed, which occurred in these articles. Missing these signs prompted the families to visit other doctors in an attempt to get a true diagnosis. Another major ethical error occurred when the doctor assumed that Pat was aware she was a carrier of the genetic disorder, and blamed her for her children inheriting the disease. He even went so far as to tell her she should have aborted, which is an absolutely unprofessional thing to say in any setting, especially in a situation where one is projecting blame onto someone who had no way of knowing. Jill attempted to get all the information about her disorder and didn’t just simply accept the doctors information as fact, which allowed her to make somewhat of a difference in her own life.
The major ethical errors are the doctors in “Mother Courage” implying that it must have been a family disease. Blaming her for having children. The extent she had to go through just for people to to take her and the disease serious.
The differences between “Mother Courage” and DIY Scientist”. The DIY Scientist” was doing all the research herself without doctors knowing what disease she had. Whereas in “Mother Courage” doctors didn’t ask her about family history assuming it ran in the family because her oldest son had it.
In the “Mother Courage” article, the doctor was being completely unethical, saying that Ms. Pat Furlong was being ignorant of her two sons rare disorder and played it off as they were quickly becoming bulk, when it reality she knew something wasn’t right. The doctor also basically told her to love them until they both die, clearly this doctor has never heard of bedside manners. Later on, once the two boys sadly passed on, Furlong continue to fight against the disease that killed her sons, Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. In the “D.I.Y Scientist” article, Ms. Jill Viles self-diagnosed herself with a muscular dystrophy disorder as well, with the help of extensive family research and tried to almost become an expert in the disorder that she has. Doctors only knew that something was wrong, but couldn’t figure out exactly what it was. The Doctors were definitely doing their best to try to find an answer unlike the doctor in the “Mother Courage” article.
There were a handful of ethical mistakes made in the mother courage article. First off, the doctors in her hometown didn’t even take the time to try and see what physical ailments they may have simply because they were mentally fine. Then the first neurologist she brought her son too simply told her to “love them, they are going to die”, which is a major taboo in the medical field to tell patients or their loved ones off their fate without actual fact that they will indeed pass away, just going based on how the disease usual ends. Another huge flaw I noticed was the fact no doctors considered how genetic diseases appear in the first place… spontaneously, so Furlong was the first female in her family to pass on the x-dominant condition, and if the doctors would have simply done a background screen of her family history, they could have seen that she had no prior history of the disease in the first place.
Jill vile was different. Considering she was the one who was actually suffering from muscular dystrophy, she was highly motivated to find a path in life where she could live a life fulfilled with this crippling disease. The difference in doctors is insane, Vile was sent to other hospitals that could help her. Unfortunately, Vile could not find the help she was ultimately looking for but atleast the doctors tried to help instead of giving her the cold shoulder like the doctors in Furlong’s case.
A major ethical error in Mother Courage was when the doctors continued to insist that nothing was wrong with the children, even though they would just slip through Furlong’s arms when grabbed. I also believe that it was awful of the doctor to tell her she could have prevented the second child because “she knew” that he would have this condition because it ran in the family, even though she really had no clue. My jaw actually dropped when I read that. Unlike those doctors, Jill was dealing with her condition and actively was trying to find out what it was and if she had it. She ultimately prolonged her father’s life and saved Priscilla’s by doing so and sticking with her research because she knew she had Emery-Dreifuss.
In the first article in Mother courage, when the mother really wanted to know why her children are coloring while others are playing, but the doctor told that they are just unruly. However that is not main concern to her but after the doctor said” there is no hope and no help, they are going to die any way.” This is the main mistake the doctor committed from what i understand. These kind of doctors has no hope for other poor people, but they are doing a poor job. I hope must doctors should understand this why they go into medicine. This is kind of similar story to what to my mom just year ago. My mom was broken her wrist while she was working and we took her to the hospital and they saw that her medicaid doesn’t have money they let’s to stay for more then six hours in Emergency department. So we decided to go into another hospital and seek for the treatment, but one innocent orthopedic doctor said ” we will take care of her and we waited additional two hours.” She finally received the treatment and we came home. In this article also show that how mothers are brave then men in term of caring of their children.
In the other article Show that this lady was knew something terrible happening to her body and after she visited many clinics and saw that there is not answers. she came home and collected the books from library and decided to find the treatment for her own. other people go to the doctors and seek the medicine, but it did not happened to this brave lady. She wanted to do her own research to find the right solution and She read many articles one by one for month.
these two articles are one the saddest articles I have read since I started to college. It gave me brief explanation that why some doctors did not understand why they went to medical school. These kind of doctors don’t deserve to be in medical field if they are not there for the patient.
The major ethical error that was made was the neurologist telling Mrs. Pat Furlong that she should have aborted her child. That is a major breach of medical etiquette; no medical professional should ever impress their personal beliefs on a patient like that, let alone concerning something as controversial as that.
As for a difference of insight, I think it’s amusing that Jill, a non-physician has successfully spearheaded several discoveries while the doctors treating muscular dystrophy that Pat dealt with more or less said “You’re screwed, we give up”. It really highlights the importance of inquisitive individuals making connections and discoveries in any field of research. When the professionals aren’t doing that, problems stagnate.
These articles were very good reads. I enjoyed learning the background information leading up to each person’s life-altering realization.
Addressing your question, the doctor in Mrs. Pat Furlong’s story did make an ethical (as well as arrogant) mistake. Not all, but some doctors are very confident in their education and experience. They doubt that they will overlook a red flag while assessing their patients. After reading what Furlong quoted from the neurologist, I am sure this exception applied to him.
It is also possible that it wasn’t an ethical mistake, but a type of social acceptance. In both articles the doctors seemed to have their ‘blinders’ on. It was like they thought no other diseases could be discovered. With this mindset, chances of rare diseases being researched is not very likely.
Women like Pat Furlong and Jill Viles are inspirational. They were both dealt a nasty hand in life but flourished despite it. Their persistency and will to learn and make connections made everything possible.
Furlong and Viles were not ‘compartmentalized’ or trapped in by different ‘realms’ of health and science. They had one open picture with an open mind to absorb all information. I think that is the main difference between the doctors and these two women.
In the article, The mother noticed early on that there was something wrong with her children. She was often turned away by doctors when she would look into the health of her children. She knew that there were answers to her questions out there and she did not give up. After persisting and doing research she was able to come to a conclusion. Eventually there had been a number of tests done to then find out they had a genetic disease called Duchenne muscular dystrophy. The doctor also adding some inappropriate behavior when it came to discussing the matter at hand. Assuming it was the mothers fault for the health of the children.
What major ethical error did a doctor make in the Mother Courage article? How do you attribute the difference in insight between this doctor and that shown by Jill Viles?
In the articles we read, the patients were showing the symptoms of rare genetic disorders. A major ethical error made in the Mother Courage article, and one that I also noticed in the DIY Scientist was that the doctors seemed to inflate their own opinions as fact without doing further testing and research, indicating there was nothing to be done about it. The doctor in Furlong’s case simply insisted that they were going to die, and there was no hope for them to live full, fulfilling lives. The doctor made her feel ashamed, despite her not being aware that it was a genetic disease that in his opinion must have run in her family- he told her she should not have reproduced after the first son, and that she should have aborted- which is rude and terribly insensitive towards her. By doing this he was stripping her of hope for her sons to be cured, but she was an adamant woman. In Jill Vile’s story about her genetic condition, she experienced it herself, rather than a son or daughter of hers. She wanted to learn more about it and her family’s history, such as her father who she saved from heart issues due to her research. She was able to find the answers she was looking for through her intensive research during college, but ultimately doctors dismissed her because she was not considered credible, and that women “could not have that condition” (not true). Eventually the doctors dismissed her second diagnosis about herself when she was an intern, saying she was believing she had all that she was reading about. The stress of this made her quit this job.
In the end, both doctors these individuals saw most likely were repeating how they were taught- that there was no cure. I feel like in Furlong’s case the doctor was intentionally rude and dismissive of any hope, and he did not pursue further treatment. In Vile’s case she was able to be referred to many clinics to keep an eye on her because she insisted she had the condition, but still she was told there was nothing to be done, and no treatments were made- she was not listened to. Both doctors were unprofessionally dismissive. In both stories however, the people did not give up after their harrowing diagnosis and outlook. They both pursued treatments and ideas and did not give up.
One ethical error that stood out to me in the Mother Courage article was when a neurologist told Furlong that there was no hope for her children, and they were going to die. I feel that there are ways to get this message across, without giving false hope and without being so heartless. It was very unprofessional to make a statement like that. It was also unethical to assume that she should have known about the trait and could have ‘prevented’ the birth of her children. Especially when the cause was due to a mutation, and not something of family history. The difference between reactions is due to muscular dystrophy being male dominant. When looking at Furlong’s experience, her two boys were not a special case, making it more difficult to find support. Jill was a rare case. When discussing lipodystrophy with doctors, they did not believe her simply because the odds were extremely rare.
The major ethical error in the Mother Courage article was made by the neurologist. This occurred when he faulted Furlong for having a second son. He scolded her on the basis that Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a hereditary disease and that she should have known better. He went on to insist that she could have prevented the birth of her second son by aborting the pregnancy. This was highly offensive to the patient and the doctor was out of line and unethical for projecting his personal beliefs onto her. This neurologist also told Furlong that she should just go home and love her children because they were going to die.
In contrast to this view held by the neurologist, Jill Viles was aware of her genetic condition and still chose to become pregnant. She was aware that there was a 50/50 % chance that her child would also have the Emery-Dreifuss gene mutation. Although Jill Viles made the choice to reproduce despite the risk of her child having the same genetic disorder as her, she still worried of the backlash she would face from others who disagreed with her decision to become pregnant. Jill Viles also had a different view from the neurologist in that she would not simply sit back and watch the disease take over. She fought for more research to be done and for more understanding of the disease to be sought. She lives her life to the fullest despite the disease and has not given up despite her prognosis.
Important note: Just because a mutation is spontaneous does not mean it will not get passed down or that it is not genetic. Family history always starts somewhere. If there is no previous family history that can mean that a mutation occurred in sperm or egg (which will not usually affect the person in which the mutation occurred) but can be passed down. Pat Furlong has 2 daughters who may be carriers. They can be tested so they can make reproductive decisions with information that Pat never had.
What I think is a major ethical error a doctor made was to avoid Pat Furlong because she was a parent of a patient. Dismissed her effort a make a valuable contribution as just a desperate parent trying to find a miracle to save their child and later a just desperate mourning parent. I think there is a big ethical error when researchers and Doctors avoid associating with the Parent Project out of fear that the Muscular Dystrophy Association would cancel their funding.
The difference in insight between Mother Courage and that shown by Jill Viles. I believe the difference is attributed to Jill Vile’s extensive research and knowledge to persuade the Doctors. some even believed she was a fellow Doctor or a Ph.D. student at least.