Balancing patient autonomy, beneficence, and the law in clinical practice presents several key ethical challenges. Patient autonomy, which upholds an individual's right to make informed decisions about their own healthcare, can sometimes conflict with beneficence, the ethical obligation of healthcare providers to act in the patient's best interest. A primary ethical dilemma arises when a patient refuses treatment that could potentially save or significantly improve their life, forcing healthcare professionals to decide whether to respect the patient’s wishes or intervene for their well-being. This becomes even more complex in cases involving minors, mentally incapacitated patients, or individuals under coercion, where questions of competency and informed consent come into play. Additionally, legal constraints further complicate decision-making, as healthcare providers must comply with laws that may not always align with ethical considerations or a patient's preferences. For instance, laws regarding assisted dying, mandatory reporting of infectious diseases, or the use of experimental treatments may impose limitations on both autonomy and beneficence. Ethical concerns also arise in cases where cultural and religious beliefs influence medical choices, requiring practitioners to navigate sensitive discussions while ensuring non-maleficence—avoiding harm. Ultimately, striking a balance among these principles demands a nuanced approach, often involving ethical committees, legal counsel, and transparent communication with patients and their families to ensure that decisions are both ethically justified and legally sound.