It is difficult to conceive of two words more important to human existence than life and death. Certainly all of us know these words intimately, and have a deep understanding of their meaning. Life and death have been principal topics of discussion in political debate and popular dialog for decades. Having a clear understanding of life and death is essential to any discussion on abortion, embryonic stem cell research, end-of-life care, and organ donation. Yet despite the seemingly obvious nature of these words and their clearly obvious importance to our existence, it turns out that life and death are somehow difficult to define. Life and death represent a dyad; their definitions inherently depend on one another. Simply defined, death is the cessation of life. Similarly, life can be defined as not death; however, not everything not alive is dead. Boniolo and Di Fiore explain this dyadic relationship well, and other authors have cited this interdependency to better define life and death.1-6 The academic literature contains multiple definitions for both terms depending on which discipline or interest group attempts the definition. Nair-Collins provides a thorough discourse on this diversity in terms of death, differentiating between “biological death, death of the person, death of the moral agent, death of the moral patient, legal death, and the commonsense notion of death.”2(p.667,668,675) Through the dyadic relationship, similar groupings could be arrived at for defining life. Whether or not one accepts Nair-Collins’ categories, at least some differentiation of this type is necessary given the complexity of these concepts. I propose a simplified categorization of the definitions of life and death: (1)scientific/biological, (2)medic... ... middle of paper ... ... is that it renders organ donation and termination of life support for brain-dead individuals impossible without “killing.” Naturally, this becomes an important factor in determining the legal definitions of life and death. Legal Definitions It is clear at this point that legally defining death is more manageable than defining life. Indeed, death is defined in U.S. Federal law by the 1981 Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA). This law incorporates both the circulatory-respiratory and the whole-brain death criteria, and remains unchanged today despite much critical analysis.2(p.667), 3(p.40) Life, on the other hand, does not appear to be as clearly legally-defined. In decisions in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey the U.S. Supreme Court has taken a pass on defining the point at which life begins.5(p.16,17) Life, it seems, is still up for interpretation.
Mortality, the subject of death, has been a curious topic to scholars, writers, and the common man. Each with their own opinion and beliefs. My personal belief is that one should accept mortality for what it is and not go against it.
In the United States and worldwide people have different culture, beliefs and attitude about death. Over the past years, death is an emotional and controversy topic that is not easy to talk about. Everyone have a different definition of what is death and when do you know that a person is really dead. In the book Death, Society, and Human Experiences by Robert J. Kastenbaum demonstrates that you are alive, even when doctors pronounce you dead.
The most argued issue with assisted suicide is grounded in morals and religion. The sanctity of life is the philosophy that human life is sacred and should be protected from any form of v...
Peck, M. Scott. Denial of the Soul: Spiritual and Medical Perspectives on Euthanasia and Mortality. New York: Harmony, 1997. Print.
The drawback, however, is that there is no agreement upon when life begins and at which point one crosses the line from unalienable rights to murder. In 1973, in what has become a landmark ruling for women’s rights, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a woman’s right to an abortion. Ever since, individual states have adopted, altered, and/or mutilated the edict to fit their agendas – Texas included. However, the decision made by the justices in Roe v. Wade didn’t set clear cut, inarguable demarcation lines, which has allowed the fiery debate to consume the nation. Rather than establishing a legal ruling on what life is, or is not, the Supreme Court has remained silent on the issue.
We believe all people have the freedom to make choices in their life, however, the question posed today is whether we have the freedom to choose our death. Some say absolutely. We should have the freedom to decide how we spend our last days. If they’re filled with pain, debilitating, and cause hardship on our loved ones, we should have the right to opt out. Others take the view that we didn’t choose our birth, therefore our death isn’t ours to choose either. This has caused much debate as moral, ethical and legal ramifications come into the mix. This in turn has led to defining the process under two different terms for legal purposes. They are euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. Internationally, assisted suicide is a doctor prescribing
It is becoming more difficult to know what to do in life and death situations. Advancements in medicine, challenges in the court, and changing opinions have raised questions about when life begins, what its value is, and when it ends. In the United States each life is very important and is taken very seriously. That is what distinguishes it from most of the other countries where we can see that there are constant wars going on and innocent people dying every day. If we start terminating people because they are not convenient or it’s expensive demeans that value. Human life is much more than just a cluster of biological cells. (Messerli, 2012)
Death is deeply personal, generally feared, and wholly inescapable, but medical technology now can prolong our biological existence virtually indefinitely, and, with these advances, comes the question of whether we should pursue the extension of life in all cases. Most people would agree that, under certain circumstances, it would be preferable to cease our hold on life. Nearly everyone can agree that there are situations when terminally ill patients have the right to call for a halt to life-extending treatments, and that their physicians will have the moral obligation to comply. What appears to be quite difficult for us as a society to come to terms with is the thought that someone would actively intervene in the "natural" process of the death of another human being. Why is it tolerable, even desirable, to intervene (with decidedly unnatural technology) in the "natural" process of death when it results in extending life, but intolerable and morally abhorrent when we act to speed the patient to his or her unavoidable death?
"Dying is an integral part of living... the right to die with dignity should be as well protected as is any other aspect of the right to life. State prohibitions that would force a dreadful, painful death on a rational but incapacitated terminally ill patient are an affront to human dignity." In addition to this, choosing the manner of death could be included as an aspect of right to life but interests of the state and society will justify interference with it, as seen in the case of Pretty v UK.
The subject of death and dying can cause many controversies for health care providers. Not only can it cause legal issues for them, but it also brings about many ethical issues as well. Nearly every health care professional has experienced a situation dealing with death or dying. This tends to be a tough topic for many people, so health care professionals should take caution when handling these matters. Healthcare professionals not only deal with patient issues but also those of the family. Some of the controversies of death and dying many include; stages of death and dying, quality of life issues, use of medications and advanced directives.
The concept of human mortality and how it is dealt with is dependent upon one’s society or culture. For it is the society that has great impact on the individual’s beliefs. Hence, it is also possible for other cultures to influence the people of a different culture on such comprehensions. The primary and traditional way men and women have made dying a less depressing and disturbing idea is though religion. Various religions offer the comforting conception of death as a begining for another life or perhaps a continuation for the former.
When one contemplates the notion of life and death, whether he or she believes in a Creator or not, the miracle in the form of the human body is undeniable. It is challenging to fathom an objective perspective of a person’s dying days, so to speak, as the experience is indeed individualistic. In the particular case of a patient named John, it is imperative to arrive at an ethical judgment regarding his request to have medical assistance in ending his life, due to his terminal illness. As a professional on the medical ethics committee concerning this case, there is a responsibility of venturing to comprehend not only morally acceptable treatments, but also to scrutinize short and long-term impacts of such decisions on the physicians, as well as society at large. Inclusive in this time sensitive process is the Christ-centered worldview that I observe, which is a set of Godly principles that govern every facet of my life.
Death persists as the great equalizer for all, and every person holds their own right to pass away when they wish. Presently in America, laws protect and grant citizens the right to order when and how they shall die when the circumstances do arise. People can assign now what is called a Do-Not-Resuscitate order (DNR) to exercise their freedom to control their own fate. The DNR order allows each individual his or her inalienable right to control their own fate. In America, all people face the choice of how and when they prefer to pass away, and physicians must respect and grant autonomy to their moribund patients while leaving their own convictions out of the circumstances with respect to the DNR order.
Death is something that causes fear in many peoples lives. People will typically try to avoid the conversation of death at all cost. The word itself tends to freak people out. The thought of death is far beyond any living person’s grasp. When people that are living think about the concept of death, their minds go to many different places. Death is a thing that causes pain in peoples lives, but can also be a blessing.
Death is one of the hardest things to over come; while others have developed paganism for death it’s ultimately the scariest thing to face in life. Losing a best friend, a family member, or the love of your life. Therefore the death of someone special is definitely the hardest thing to face. Many people believe when someone dies, they’re sleeping, and they wake up when Jesus comes again and brings you to heaven with him, this is called Christianity, however, Buddhism believe when the body dies it disappears, but the mind goes on, which means you have no after life to experience. I personally believe after you die, you will go to a very special place, with past family members who have passed away. I also believe if you don’t think there is a God you will go to