Four topics will be available for you on LEO. You will select one of these topics and construct a written essay. You are encouraged to choose a topic that you feel is important to you and that you...

WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT        2
WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT
Table of contents
Introduction    3
Discussion    3
Autonomy    3
Beneficence    4
Non-Maleficence    5
Justice    6
Other Ethical Concepts    6
Ethical Theories    8
Conclusion    9
References    11
Introduction
    The main topic of ethical controversy in the healthcare industry is whether Australia should adopt a user-pays system for non-emergency medical procedures. This research dives into this complicated topic with the goal of offering a thorough and impartial review of the ethical ramifications of such a proposal. In addition to being a problem of public health, the provision of healthcare services raises significant ethical issues. It entails striking a delicate balance between patient autonomy, healthcare practitioners' obligations to act in their patients' best interests, the need to prevent damage, and the moral need to provide justice and equal access to healthcare resources. The issue of whether people should be responsible for the cost of non-urgent medical procedures in Australia, where a mix of public and private healthcare systems coexist, involves complex ethical issues. In this research, we explore the possible advantages and difficulties of the user-pays approach in relation to these ethical standards. We aim to provide a nuanced understanding of this contentious issue and ultimately offer guidance for policymakers and healthcare professionals seeking to make ethical decisions regarding the future of Australia's healthcare system through a thorough analysis of bioethical principles, ethical concepts, and various ethical theories.
Discussion
Autonomy
    A fundamental bioethical notion known as autonomy stresses people's freedom to make decisions about their own life, including their health (Patterson No
ie et al., 2020). In Australia, a user-pays system is used for non-emergency medical procedures, and autonomy is important. The argument put up by proponents of this system is that it respects autonomy by allowing people to make decisions about their healthcare. Based on their choices and values, patients can choose treatments, providers, and the timing of interventions under this paradigm (Betoni et al., 2023). They are free to order their healthcare requirements according to their ability to pay for them, and if they can afford it, they can choose to pay more for extra services or quick treatment. By acknowledging that people have a range of healthcare preferences and the ability to make decisions that are in line with their unique situations, this method upholds the idea of individual autonomy. However, a user-pays system also presents problems for autonomy. Financial limitations may restrict people's options, possibly creating conditions in which only those with substantial financial means may obtain timely and desired healthcare services. This can lead to moral quandaries since some people may be pressured to make healthcare decisions based on cost rather than what they actually want or need. In conclusion, autonomy is a complicated topic in the context of a user-pays healthcare system. It must deal with the possibility of inequities in healthcare access based on financial resources while upholding the notion of individual choice. Policymakers should be guided by autonomy-related ethical concerns in order to strike a balance that respects individual decision-making while guaranteeing fair access to essential medical treatments.
Beneficence
    The moral need to act in a way that benefits and promotes the well-being of patients is emphasized by the bioethical principle of beneficence (Klessa, 2021). Beneficence poses important ethical questions in the context of Australia's user-pays system for non-emergency medical procedures. Supporters contend that by possibly raising the general level of quality and effectiveness of healthcare services, such a system can be in line with beneficence. Healthcare providers may innovate, improve service delivery, and raise the bar of treatment as a result of competition for paying patients, eventually benefiting those patients who can afford it. However, problems arise when profit interests shape healthcare choices (Andreß et al., 2022). According to critics, a user-pays system may put financial gain ahead of true altruism, perhaps resulting in overuse of medical services or the pursuit of cures motivated by profit rather than patient welfare. A user-pays system requires ethical attention to guarantee that the pursuit of financial interests does not jeopardize the patients' real well-being. To encourage ethical healthcare delivery that actually serves every person in the Australian healthcare system, policymakers and healthcare practitioners must manage these challenges.
Non-Maleficence
    The fundamental bioethical precept of non-malfeasance requires healthcare professionals to "do no harm" to patients. It is a fundamental tenet of moral healthcare practice and bears a lot of weight when Australia adopts a user-pays system for non-emergency medical procedures (Morley, 2019). A user-pays system, according to its proponents, might potentially improve patient outcomes by reducing damage by reducing congestion and lengthy wait times in the public healthcare system. The goal of...