Ethics refers to the standard of right or wrong. Medical ethics constitutes one of the essential branches of medicine, because it is the guiding principle for a competent doctor. It is a moral philosophy that involves conflicts in duties and their possible outcomes. Doctors often encounter dilemmas in the course of discharging their obligations and this requires them to make the best choice that will bring more benefit and less harm. However, making such a decision has never been easy, and therefore it is necessary to consider the results and consequences of the decision. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay This case study is a classic ethical dilemma of hospital reimbursement after treatment of illegal immigrants requiring dialysis treatment. Federal regulations state that when a patient enters an emergency room for emergency medical care, they must be treated and cared for. Doctors cannot question a patient's ability to pay, or their citizenship status. However, contrary to the above, it is often clear to doctors that limited treatment can be provided to undocumented immigrants, due to the difficulty of being reimbursed for the cost of the medicine. This creates a state of conflict over whether or not doctors should treat such undocumented aliens (Nordtug, 2015). The decision has outcomes as well as consequences; so professional healthcare workers are faced with the problem of choosing what is right and what is wrong. The stakeholders in this study are doctors and the federal government. The government has a provision for treating patients who require emergency care. Instead, doctors are limited to caring for undocumented immigrants. Theories relevant to this study include deontology and unitarianism (Francis, 2017). Deontological theory is concerned with duties and rights, regardless of consequences, and this implies that a doctor is responsible for caring for a patient without considering the implications of the action. Furthermore, every patient has the right to be treated and assisted. On the other hand, Unitarianism dictates that a doctor should do what is moral and benefits as many people as possible. It is therefore morally correct for a doctor not to provide healthcare to illegal immigrants, but instead use these medicines for the broader population, who have medical insurance, meaning the hospital will be reimbursed. This dilemma has been created by rules and regulations from both the government and the medical industry. In the first instance, the federal government states that patients brought to the emergency room must be treated and must not be turned away. Relevant rules and regulations in the medical sector have limited the provision of healthcare to undocumented foreigners. Therefore, these rules and regulations are contradictory and pose a dilemma to professional healthcare providers. There are some possible outcomes and alternatives in the case of the dilemma. The deaths of immigrants who are denied care because of their illegal status could lead to lawsuits against doctors who violate federal rules and regulations. One alternative is a joint negotiation between the federal government and the public health sector to harmonize the rules and regulations governing the provision of health care to immigrants. Another alternative would be to treat illegal immigrant patients before turning them over to federal government authorities. Although it is wrong to go against EI norms.