Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
problems with euthanasia and assisted suicide
euthanasia in healthcare
research moral and ethical issues around euthanasia.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: problems with euthanasia and assisted suicide
It is the principle of conduct which requires us (healthcare workers) to act in a way that benefits others (patients) by preventing or removing harm, or more directly acting to produce a good
Due to the nature of the job, it can be said that nurses often have to deal with the situtaion of ethical dilemas. Because we live in a culturaly diverse society, our values are not necessarily the same. This often gives the leeway for ethical dilemas such as, whether euthanasia and assisted suicide are moraly right or wrong. Euthanasia is defined as "a deliberate intervention or omission with the express intention of hastening or ending an individual's life, to relieve intractable pain or suffering" (Sanders, 2007). Assisted suicide refers to making available to an individual the means (for example, pills or a weapon) to take his or her own life” (Michele, 2004). Euthanasia and assisted suicide are argued to be done to relieve a patient from pain and suffering, however that can be countered. It is important for one to consider the reasoning behind why people ask for euthanasia or assisted suicide. In the case of Mr. Maxwell, who is diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis for more than 10 years and is requesting for euthanasia. Morally, I do not support his request to remove his ventilator because it is unethical. This paper focuses on why euthanasia and assisted suicide are wrong from the perspective of autonomy, nonmaleficence and rule-utilitarianism. Very good
Autonomy
Autonomy is usually used to justify the act of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Autonomy is said to be the right to self-government. "Within the contexts of moral and bioethical philosophy it is the capacity of a rational individual to make an informed, un-coerced d...
... middle of paper ...
...st cases, they are not well informed about other options they might have. It is the role of the nurse to provide the patient with other alternatives other than suicide. "The autonomy of the patient is important, but not absolute.” (Quadhebeur, 2009) Realizing that the nurse's role is not to do harm is as well important, because when nurses are seen as both care givers and killers, it makes it hard for patients to put their trust on nurses. As the rule utilitarian will argue, it is important to do what is morally right. Not killing an innocent human being is right in this situation, and this theory should be adhered to. Finally, it can be argued that "euthanasia is too drastic an intervention to be used for patients at the end of their life; this is because it makes dealing correctly with death almost impossible and it is also irreversible" (Quaghebeur, 2009).
Euthanasia and assisted suicide is known as a process in which an individual (sick or disabled) engages in an act that leads to his or her own death with the help of physicians or family members to end pain and suffering. There are several other terms used for this process, such as active euthanasia or passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia refers to what is being done to actively end life while passive euthanasia is referred as eliminating a treatment that will prolong a patient’s life, which will eventually lead to death (Levy et al., 2103, p. 402). Euthanasia and assisted suicide pose a significant ethical issue today, and understanding the issue requires examining the different principles, such as the ethical issue, professional code of conduct, strength and limitations, autonomy and informed consent, beneficence and nonmaleficence, distribution, and confidentiality and truthfulness.
Another reason a patient may opt to euthanasia is to die with dignity. The patient, fully aware of the state he or she is in, should be able choose to die in all their senses as opposed to through natural course. A patient with an enlarged brain tumor can choose to die respectively, instead of attempting a risky surgery that could leave the patient in a worse condition then before the operation, possibly brain-dead. Or a patient with early signs of Dementia or Alzheimer’s disease may wish to be granted euthanization before their disease progresses and causes detrimental loss of sentimental memories. Ultimately it should be the patient’s choice to undergo a risky surgery or bite the bullet, and laws prohibiting euthanasia should not limit the patient’s options.
Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is a topic, which proponents often support by the affirmation of patient free will or as the exercise of patient autonomy. The purpose of this paper is to examine this argument further from an inter-disciplinary approach, regarding PAS from medical, ethical and legal standpoints and to examine the concept of free will from the philosophical discipline. Are these concepts compatible in a meaningful context and can a sound argument be constructed to support PAS on the basis of patient free will?
Euthanasia has been a long debated subject consisting of many opinions and believes. For this paper I will be providing my rationale on why I am for legalization of active voluntary euthanasia for terminally ill clients in Canada. Active voluntary euthanasia should be legalized because it respects the individual’s choice, it allows individuals to flourish in their passing, and reduces the individual from further suffering. These are all important components of bioethics, and are all good reasons why euthanasia is not a negative thing. Active voluntary euthanasia is “the active killing of a dying person” requested by the client themselves (Collier & Haliburton, 2011, p. 226). In the paper I will also be discussing about virtue ethics, the principle of autonomy, and care ethics.
There exists two possible solutions to the ethical dilemma of a terminally ill patient’s right to die: they are the legalization of physician assisted suicide and the banning of it. This paper will explore whether the legalization of PAS should be the recommended course of action or whether there are sufficient negative issues surrounding it to make the banning of it, the correct ethical choice.
In today's society, one of the most controversial health-care-related ethical issues is assisted suicide for terminally ill patients. Assisted suicide is not to be confused with ethically justified end-of-life decisions and actions. Nurses have a responsibility to deliver comprehensive and benevol...
As precious as life is to come in to this world, there is debate about whether life going out of this world should hold the same amount of pricelessness, happiness, and peace in cases of the terminally ill with no chance of long-term survival. This deliberation of whether physician assisted suicide should be permitted is a major medical ethical concern, however, as a future nurse, this argument does not have a place in modern medicine. In the following sections, the ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence are discussed with regard to the patient’s best interest and the personal views and opinions of a prospective nurse.
The American Nurses Association (ANA) thinks that nurses should stay away from doing euthanasia, or assisting in doing euthanasia because it is against the Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements (ANA, 2001; herein referred to as The Code). Overall, nurses are also advised to deliver a quality of care what include respect compassion and dignity to all their patients. For people in end-of-life, nursing care should also focus on the patient’s comfort, when possible the dying patient should be pain free. Nurses have also the obligation to support the patient but also the patient’s family members during these difficult moments. We must work to make sure that patients and family members are well informed about every option that is
Mercy killing, also known as euthanasia or assisted suicide, is the end of life of an extremely incapacitated individual’s existence so as to calm them of their agony. Anyone who experiences it generally has a hopeless condition. Such as someone with a terminal ill disease that is not curable. For example, a patient with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or metastasize cancer in its final stage. Be that as it may, there are different occurrences where few individuals need their life to be finished. This process is solely based on the individual’s request and some cases carried out by relatives, specialist or in a couple of cases, the courts. “The moral concern of willful euthanasia is tied into the centrality of life, reason behind accommodating treatment and the patient capability to pick when treatment or life ought to end” (Baillie et al., 2013 p 168). Therefore, addressing the decisions and concerns behind euthanasia is a debatable topic that requires a continuous analysis of this issue.
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
As patients come closer to the end of their lives, certain organs stop performing as well as they use to. People are unable to do simple tasks like putting on clothes, going to the restroom without assistance, eat on our own, and sometimes even breathe without the help of a machine. Needing to depend on someone for everything suddenly brings feelings of helplessness much like an infant feels. It is easy to see why some patients with terminal illnesses would seek any type of relief from this hardship, even if that relief is suicide. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is where a physician would give a patient an aid in dying. “Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, Medical practioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death” (Lee). “Arguments for and against assisted suicide (sometimes called the “right to die” debate) are complicated by the fact that they come from very many different points of view: medical issues, ethical issues, legal issues, religious issues, and social issues all play a part in shaping people’s opinions on the subject” (Lee). Euthanasia should not be legalized because it is considered murder, it goes against physicians’ Hippocratic Oath, violates the Controlled
The right to assisted suicide is a significant topic that concerns people all over the United States. The debates go back and forth about whether a dying patient has the right to die with the assistance of a physician. Some are against it because of religious and moral reasons. Others are for it because of their compassion and respect for the dying. Physicians are also divided on the issue. They differ where they place the line that separates relief from dying--and killing. For many the main concern with assisted suicide lies with the competence of the terminally ill. Many terminally ill patients who are in the final stages of their lives have requested doctors to aid them in exercising active euthanasia. It is sad to realize that these people are in great agony and that to them the only hope of bringing that agony to a halt is through assisted suicide.When people see the word euthanasia, they see the meaning of the word in two different lights. Euthanasia for some carries a negative connotation; it is the same as murder. For others, however, euthanasia is the act of putting someone to death painlessly, or allowing a person suffering from an incurable and painful disease or condition to die by withholding extreme medical measures. But after studying both sides of the issue, a compassionate individual must conclude that competent terminal patients should be given the right to assisted suicide in order to end their suffering, reduce the damaging financial effects of hospital care on their families, and preserve the individual right of people to determine their own fate.
According to Immanuel Kant, a person has dignity that makes him autonomous. Thus, the decision of the autonomous patient to die has intrinsic value. Because patients are rational agent, they are able to make their own decision based on reason. A rational patient will reason that if continued existence is full of suffering and no-hope for better well-being, therefore, the best option is to discontinue his/her life to save him/herself from that future condition. It is the patient’s approach to manage his/her own life. Dan W. Brock is right in his article “Voluntary Active Euthanasia” when he said that, “self-determination [or autonomy] has fundamental value… [because]… individual [can] control the manner, circumstances, and timing of their dying and death” (75). The dignity of the patient lies in their “capacity to direct their lives” (Brock 75).
Death. This is not a topic that many people are comfortable discussing. It is such an uncomfortable topic to discuss because regardless if death is brought upon through natural death, murder, suicide, or even euthanasia, it brings upon such a wide variety of emotions to those affected that I believe no one can grow accustomed to. Stemming from this, we get into the debate of euthanasia vs. murder vs. suicide, and the ethics behind the three. Before considering the differences between the them, we should first be able to define ethics and morals. Nowadays, these two terms can be considered very similar, and are said to be the sort of principles that decide a person’s behavior and actions. Ethics and morals play a big role when discussing these topics, as people are quick to argue that euthanasia and murder can be considered the same. Through this paper, I will argue their differences, and how most aspects of euthanasia can be considered morally different and better than murder. Additionally, my perspective of how suicide compares and differs to these two will also be introduced.
‘Mercy’, ‘dignity’, ‘good’ and ‘self-determination’ are the moral basis that the advocates for euthanasia defend. How appealing they sound, their accounts are simply an attempt to escape from dying process, through which we still hold our existence. The argument of pro-euthanasia might suggest that we are able to control over our life and death without moral conflict because such values related to euthanasia can justify the action of killing.