Ethics & Law · patient case with 2 questions
Case: two ethical scenarios
Scenario: Two situations in professional conduct.
Question 1
A dentist submits a claim to the insurance company describing a procedure other than the one actually performed. Which principle has been violated?
Show answer and explanation
Correct answer: D. Veracity
- A. Justice concerns fairness in the distribution of care and resources. It is arguably touched here, but veracity is the direct violation.
- B. Beneficence is the duty to act for the patient's benefit. It is not the principle at stake in a falsified claim.
- C. Autonomy concerns the patient's right to make informed decisions about their own care.
- D. Correct. Veracity is the duty of truthfulness. Misrepresenting a procedure on a claim form is a false statement — and beyond the ethical breach, it is insurance fraud.
Question 2
A dentist presents an implant as the only possible treatment, telling the patient there are no other options when reasonable alternatives exist. Which principle is violated?
Show answer and explanation
Correct answer: B. Veracity
- A. Nonmaleficence concerns avoiding harm. No direct harm has yet been done.
- B. Correct per the options offered. Telling the patient no alternatives exist when they do is a false statement, and veracity is the breach among the choices given.
- C. Beneficence is not the primary issue — the implant may well be a good treatment; the problem is how the choice was presented.
- D. Justice concerns fair allocation and is not engaged by this scenario.
Note: ⚑ The principle most directly violated here is actually autonomy — valid informed consent requires disclosure of all reasonable alternatives, including no treatment. The recall notes that autonomy was not among the options, which is why veracity is keyed. If autonomy appears on your exam, choose it.