Ethical guide to answering MMI's: What takes precedence?

[deleted981412]

---

Members don't see this ad.

So, from my prep so far it seems that for a lot of the MMI ethical scenarios, you must use the 4 principles to structure your answer. However, we often see that things clash, for example, something that may be against the patient's wishes like blood transfusions for jehovah's witnesses may actually save a life. So in these cases does beneficence take precedence over autonomy? Does autonomy get less and less precedence as the more serious the consequence aka life saving situations, or not even at that level? I understand that you can argue any of these ideas, but I feel like there is a less sociopath-y way to answer some of these questions? is patient autonomy always the trump card? successful interviewers, please share your wisdom!

 

[calipremed5768]

Sad to say but most of the time the right answer is what the interviewer agrees with beforehand. This ain’t a Lincoln Douglas debate where you can win them over

 

[Zharp]

IMO, you’re looking at this too black and white. Some scenarios will try to make you think about the gray areas, so don’t expect them all to fit into the same framework.

Usually respecting patient autonomy is always something you need to keep in mind as you plan out your answers and should be something you mention. In your jehovas and blood transfusions example, you likely respect patient autonomy regardless of the lack of beneficence.

But what most MMI interviewers want you to do is flesh out why you’d follow a certain plan of action and what else you’d want to know to make your decisions.