Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethics surrounding euthanasia
Ethics surrounding euthanasia
Ethics surrounding euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethics surrounding euthanasia
End-of-life decision making has become a widely held debate in regards to the ethical and moral dilemmas it presents in our society. With advancing technology within the medical field our natural lives have been greatly extended, prolonging our quality of life, or so it seems (Fisher, 2013). Although it may appear to only be a positive contribution to one’s everyday life, it often has a habit of extending and increasing the burdens for individuals who suffer towards the end of their lives (Fisher, 2013). This can cause longer periods of debilitation, whether it is emotionally, physically, or financially (Fisher, 2013). In addition to this a patient’s dignity is often compromised, along with the loss of control, increased dependency, and increased …show more content…
Depending on an individual competence, and if they are mentally mature to do so, is often the main factor in determining the level of control and intervention (Fisher, 2013). The theory basis itself on the idea of whether individuals who are close to the patient can be used as an agent in understanding the situation, and the possible steps to prevent any harm before it occurs (Fisher, 2013). Paternalism itself means “father-knows-best”, promoting the ideal that individuals believe they know best, and have more knowledge and skill because of their experience (Fisher, 2013). This is especially relevant to the case because it reflects the values of Mr. Latimer in the murder of his daughter Tracy Latimer. Mr. Latimer believed what he was doing to his daughter was for the better good, which is where we see strong evidence of paternalism theory. Through his ignorance and belief, this was the only correct option caused him to exercise what is known as weak paternalism. Weak paternalism is defined as paternalism that is used in an irrational fashion that could lead to harm to themselves or others, for this reason Mr. Latimer actions cannot be justified, and therefore are wrong (Fisher, 2013). On top of this Tracy Latimer’s autonomy was greatly limited, along with her medical and physical interests, promoting …show more content…
The purpose of morality is to serve as a system of rules and obligations to prohibit particular actions within society, by generating co-operative behaviour, and regulating interpersonal relations (Fisher, 2013). Built upon mutual respect, the goal is for everyone to feel safe within society when one can adhere to the predictability of their actions (Fisher, 2013). Mr. Latimer did not abide by this regulation, taking drastic measures into his own hands, and ultimately causing irreversible harm upon his daughter. This is morally and ethically wrong, breaking not only moral rights, but political rights, and legal rights (Fisher, 2013). Mr. Latimer actions also cannot be morally justified, even though he had his daughter’s welfare in mind, Tracy Latimer’s human rights were compromised, resulting in a breach that can be explained through Paternalism Theory, and the Ethic of Care Theory. By executing what is known at weak paternalism, and breaking the two prong policy in the ethic of care theory, caused Mr. Latimer to fall into an a moral dilemma with negative consequences. Moving forward into the future it is important to learn from cases such as Tracy Latimer to prevent and learn from mistakes, taking moral decision making to new and better
As a result, life-sustaining procedures such as ventilators, feeding tubes, and treatments for infectious and terminal diseases are developing. While these life-sustaining methods have positively influenced modern medicine, they also inadvertently cause terminal patients extensive pain and suffering. Previous to the development of life-sustaining procedures, many people died in the care of their own home, however, today the majority of Americans take their last breath lying in a hospital bed. As the advancement of modern medicine continues, physicians and patients are going to encounter life-altering trials and tribulations. Arguably, the most controversial debate in modern medicine is the discussion of the ethical choice for physician-assisted suicide.
However it can also make room for medical, legal and ethical dilemmas. Advances in medical technology enable individuals to delay the inevitable fate of death, overcome cancer, diabetes, and various traumatic injuries. Our advances in medical technologies now allow these individuals to do things on their own terms. The “terminally ill” state is described as having an incurable or irreversible condition that has a high probability of causing death within a relatively short time with or without treatment (Guest, p.3, 1998). A wide range of degenerative diseases can fall into either category, ranging from, HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease and many forms of cancer. This control, however, lays assistance, whether direct or indirect, from a
Terminally ill patients deserve the right to have a dignified death. These patients should not be forced to suffer and be in agony their lasting days. The terminally ill should have this choice, because it is the only way to end their excruciating pain. These patients don’t have
There are several important ethical issues related to euthanasia. One is allowing people who are terminally ill and suffering the right to choose death. Should these people continue to suffer even though they really are ba...
Atul Gawande’s book, Being Mortal, focuses on end-of-life care for patients in the American healthcare system. Gawande includes evidence along with anecdotes from his own life surrounding his career as a surgeon and his role in helping family members navigate their own end-of-life decisions. Much of Gawande’s argument rests on the premise that while end-of-life care in the American healthcare system is heroic and equipped with the best possible advancements in medicine, it too often fails the patients it is supposed to help. A large part of Being Mortal focuses on the doctor-patient relationship (especially in the context of shared-decision making) and how we often fail to recognize the things that are most important for our elderly in their
Decision-making would be so much easier if we all maintained our autonomy in making the decision, however, because our decisions do not always abide by autonomistic values paternalistic intervention must occur. The purpose of autonomy is to allow us to choose to do things that affect only ourselves and does not negatively affect those around us. Unfortunately, many choices do, whether we know it or not, involve those in our environment. Paternalism is in place to protect the rights that are in our best interest and that will benefit us in the long run. Paternalistic intervention occurs when decisions are no longer in our best interests. If the decision is like to be regretted and irreversible in the future, paternalism is again justified. Autonomy is a fleeting concept, for as soon as someone chooses to do something that will later cause an addiction, his or her autonomy is lost. They no longer have the decision to do or not to do the action; it becomes a need.
There is great debate in this country and worldwide over whether or not terminally ill patients who are experiencing great suffering should have the right to choose death. A deep divide amongst the American public exists on the issue. It is extremely important to reach an ethical decision on whether or not terminally ill patients have this right to choose death, since many may be needlessly suffering, if an ethical solution exists.
Health professionals are constantly working on improvements because of ethical concerns that they face in their everyday lives. The relationship between a physician and a patient is often seen as a relationship with no errors or ethical concerns but that is not the case. There are constant adjustments that are made to ensure everyone is accounted for and treated in a humane manner. Although the health system focuses on accommodating for everyone, there are many times that adolescents suffer due to their inability to make their own decisions in a health setting. Adolescents do not have the ability to make their own decisions towards their health without parental or guardian consents and many times they also base their final decision on the bias opinions of their physician or parent/guardians. Some important key concepts to understand when analyzing this issue is what paternalism and autonomy means. Autonomy is when a person can freely make their own decisions and paternalism is when someone disregards a person’s decision, and does not allow autonomy (Vaughn,71). It is important to realize that promoting adolescent autonomy at an early age allows adolescents to practice self-care and be well informed about medical procedures (Beacham & Deatrick, 2013). In order to prevent these issues from
The advancement of technology in the medical field has prolonged the lives of individuals, but certain terminal illnesses lead to inevitable death. Health care team members working in end-of-life care are being faced with the ethical dilemmas introduced by the physician-assisted suicide legalization, also known as the Death with Dignity Act, in the United States (Lachman, 2010). Physician-assisted suicide, or euthanasia in some texts, allows mentally competent, terminally ill individuals, with less than 6 months to live, a choice to self-administer physician prescribed medication, which assists in death (Friend, 2011; Harris, 2014; Lachman, 2010). Although the patient administers the fatal dose to his or her self, the ethical dilemma arises of whether physician-assisted suicide is the individual’s right, or a violation of human life (Harris, 2014). Terminally ill individuals should have the option to end their suffering during end-of-life care through physician-assisted suicide.
During the court case the judge said that lead social worker Gunn Wahlstrom was “naïve beyond belief”. This report brought over 68 recommendations to make sure cases like this did not happen again. The recommendations included putting the child first and the parent’s second. “Jasmines’ fate illustrates all too clearly the disastrous consequences of the misguides attitude of the social workers having treated Morris Beckford and Beverley Lorrington as the clients first and foremost” (London Borough of Brent, 1985,p295). The social workers in Jasmine’s c...
One of the many concerns is allowing incompetent individuals making this irreversible decision, which is why, “all have agreed that this end-of-life option should apply on to competent individual’s”(113). In addition, people opposed to this method argue that patients demanding this process are suffering from depression and not able to make decisions; yet, Rosenfled explains that practitioners most ensure that patients who consent to this medical intervention do it voluntarily, knowingly and
Robert Ho and Natalie Chantagul are authors of the journal Support for Voluntary and Non-voluntary Euthanasia: What Roles Do Conditions of Suffering and the Identity of the Terminally III Play?. Robert Ho is a professor of biology and anatomy. Natalie Chantagul has a phD in physiology. It is not seen as morally wrong to euthanized a patients, if done by the request of the patient and only if requested by the patient (Ho and Chantagul 253). Many times patients request euthanasia in order to reduce the pain and suffering Patients also seek to be euthanized, because they feel that they are a weight on their loved ones (Ho and Chantagul 254). It is difficult for people living with terminally illness and have to endure pain and suffering and not be able to opt for terminating their life. The people that do chose euthanasia, do it because they do not want their loved ones to endure their pain and suffering as well and they do not want to feel that they are a cargo on their family. There is new research suggesting that the treatments used for patients on life support ,do not meet their needs nor do they meet the patients will (Gardner 226). Nurses try to ease the pain of the patients who are terminally ill, but many times these patients feel humiliated and undesirable when they continue to live in this desperate situation (Gardner
A divergent set of issues and opinions involving medical care for the very seriously ill patient have dogged the bioethics community for decades. While sophisticated medical technology has allowed people to live longer, it has also caused protracted death, most often to the severe detriment of individuals and their families. Ira Byock, director of palliative medicine at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, believes too many Americans are “dying badly.” In discussing this issue, he stated, “Families cannot imagine there could be anything worse than their loved one dying, but in fact, there are things worse.” “It’s having someone you love…suffering, dying connected to machines” (CBS News, 2014). In the not distant past, the knowledge, skills, and technology were simply not available to cure, much less prolong the deaths of gravely ill people. In addition to the ethical and moral dilemmas this presents, the costs of intensive treatment often do not realize appreciable benefits. However, cost alone should not determine when care becomes “futile” as this veers medicine into an even more dangerous ethical quagmire. While preserving life with the best possible care is always good medicine, the suffering and protracted deaths caused from the continued use of futile measures benefits no one. For this reason, the determination of futility should be a joint decision between the physician, the patient, and his or her surrogate.
Thus, despite the arguments against euthanasia, patients’ lives should not be deprived of well-being, comfort or dignity. “In the last stage of life, every person is entitled to a high standard of care and a stable environment in which his or her privacy is respected” (Policy Options, 2013). A lot of the time, patients with terminal illnesses are thought of as ‘better off dead’ or ‘not the person they used to be’. This is all the more the reason why euthanasia should be legalized in Canada. The government should relax current laws and allow doctors to participate in assisted suicide if need be and are willing. If people suffering with terminal illnesses want to die peacefully and not endure painful procedures or live off machines whilst also helping society out money wise, the option should be available.
Cummings, C. L., & Mecurio, M. R. (2011). Autonomy, beneficence, and the rights of parents and children: Exploring the application of ethical principles in pediatrics. American Academy of Pediatrics Bioethics Resident Curriculum: Care-Based Teaching Guides. Retrieved from http://www2.aap.org/sections/bioethics/PDFs/Curriculum_Session10.pdf