this is a case study in which one is to use 2 medical ethic theories and make a decision as to what the doc should do by justifying the steps with the two theories!

Ms. A a 35 year old secretary is found after a routine pap test to have
a cancer of the cervix. The cancer is at its earliest stage, confined to
the cervix with minor invasions of the cervical tissue. The tumor is
still easily treatable by means of a simple hysterectomy. Even though
the physician informs Ms. A that there is a 90% chance of full cure, she
is very distraught and apprehensive. When the physician raises the
issue of scheduling the surgery Ms. A is evasive and says she wants to
think things over. The physician makes another appointment with her for
a week later. Ms. A is still very reluctant to discuss the matter of
surgery but agrees that “most likely it is something I have to
face.� She than asks what risks would be involved in a hysterectomy.
The doctor is concerned that if he describes all of the risks in full
detail (for example, injury to the bladder, to the ureter (the tube that
connects the kidney to the bladder), injury to the bowel and/or
intestinal obstruction, and urinary incontinence, not to mention the
possibility of death due to anesthesia), Ms. A will postpone the surgery
even further. He wonders whether he should instead inform Ms. A’s
husband of the usual risks and indicate to Ms. A more globally that
things will probably go well and that people are able to return home
from the hospital after only a few days. What should Ms. A’s physician
do?

If u think he should hide the risks from her and tell her husband than u
can use Utilitarianism and one other same theory. U can say that u think
he should not tell her and proceed with the surgery. I think he should
speak with her husband who should convince her that everything will be
ok and she should go ahead with the surgery. There will be no harm in
lying to her or postponing the answers to her questions to a later time
to so she eventually forgets her questions.

However:

If u think it is wrong to hide these risks from her than u can use kants
theory and say lying is wrong in all cases and a competent patient
should know all the risks and all the info and make their own choice.
And also u can use a same theory as kant’s theory and say that the
patient should know all the truth and make their own choice.

Also: u may use a theory like utilitarianism and say that it is ok to
lie, but also say that according to an opposing theory like kant (this
states no lying) u should do this. However, regardless it is better to
follow theory X and do this because it is for the patients betterment.
Conclude it.

Just make a decision and justify it with a theory. U can use two same
theories or use two opposing theories and conclude by telling us which
is better to follow.

That’s all! Sorry if I talk to much!