In some cases, it includes a lethal injection, which is an act of killing someone and this is referred to as “active euthanasia,” which is an act of... ... middle of paper ... ...ncurable diseases or accidents like Dax Cowart where the person’s life after would never be the same or could never be what the individual imagined their life to be, patients should have the option to die a painless way. . The United States of America is becoming more accepting of this alternative to painful treatments that patients in this state would receive. With the removal of “The Appropriate Ends” area from the Hippocratic oath, it is clear that the U.S. is making a big push toward legalizing euthanasia. Legalizing euthanasia will open another opportunity for suffering patients, because regardless of whether or not euthanasia is an option, suicidal patients will find a way to die and many times this is more brutal and painful than euthanasia.
Meaning, "good death". But the word “euthanasia” today means taking action to achieve a good death. Euthanasia is often used by doctors; the doctor would prepare the patient a lethal dose of drugs and administer the drugs to them or the doctor injects the patient with lethal injections. There are two different forms of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is the hastening of a persons’ death by injections or a different form of assisted suicide while passive euthanasia is the withholding of treatment or medications that are currently keeping the patient alive (Barbuzzi, p.1, 2014).
To suffering, terminally ill patients who are dying natural deaths, euthanasia should be a legal option. We often hear, "The person was going to die anyway. We were just letting nature take its course." We can not be held responsible for the death of a person if we are prolonging their life my means of technology. If a person is sick then they usually take medicine, which is a technological aid.
Knowing that the participation of a nurse is opposed wouldn’t affect anything. Im not against the use of assisted suicide or with it, it’s more a neutral position. Of course, I would follow the Code of Nursing and not do so. Its best to inform the patient and help them in any other ways possible instead. Conclusion Assisted suicide is the use of a lethal dose of medication prescribed by the doctor but given by the patient.
PAS has some benefits with it but it also has some disadvantages. The benefits of assisted suicide for the terminally ill individual are significant, even though the debates still raise questions about the responsibilities of the medical comm... ... middle of paper ... ...d insensitive but physician assisted suicide offers great relief to those who are terminally ill and suffering. The individual who is suffering from these types of conditions should have the right to die with dignity and not have to suffer due to great pain; this should be realized by the public, medical community, and any group that has any type of ethical concern. Works Cited Gupta, Deepak. “Euthanasia: Issues Implied Within”.
• The doctor who prescribes the patient and another physician must confirm the diagnosis and prognosis. • If either physician believes the patient's judgment is impaired by a psychiatric or psychological disorder, the patient must take a psychological examination. • The physician must inform the patient of alternatives to assisted suicide. Such as comfort care, hospital care, and pain management. During 1998, 1999 and 2000, approximately 16, 27, and 27 patients used PAS.
In order to understand my research paper, you first need to know the back ground of euthanasia. Euthanasia is an uncommon painless killing of a patient that is suffering from an incurable and painful disease with a dose of a lethal injection. Euthanasia is also known as assisted suicide, physician-assisted death, physician-assisted suicide, and mercy killing. It is a doctor prescribed medication which puts a person into a coma like state. The shot includes Rocuronium bromide which paralyzes all the muscles and stops breathing which is what will eventually kill the body.
I believe in miracles, meaning that someone can be saved before taking Euthanasia. Euthanasia should be the last resort for a patient that’s near death to consider. I don’t think doctors should suggest it or imply to the patient. Doctors shouldn’t give the medicine to any humans or in fact animals as well. In addition, doctors most definitely shouldn’t give it to babies or special need children or adults.
The patient might just be waiting for the disease they have caught to kill them, but it does not always go so quickly . ¨Ending a patient's life by injection, with the added solace that it will be quick and painless, is much easier than this constant physical and emotional care¨ (Ezekiel Emanuel, 1997, p. 75). If a patient is terminally ill and will not get better, it allows them to end the suffering. If the physician has to keep a constant eye on the patient and they need constant care and the patient is not getting better, the option is there if they want to end all of it they can. Sometimes dealing with all of the physical care like medications and not being able to live completely normal with a disease is hard.
In this case the immediate cause of death of a patient is not their disease but something done to the patient to cause his or her demise. My goal in this paper is to argue against active euthanasia since I see it follows the same principle as homicide. Active euthanasia Death is not a choice that lies on anyone’s decision. The doctor’s role is to safeguard the patient’s life and not to take it away. Health practitioners take an oath to safeguard life at all cost, this implies that a doctor should not kill at any given moment.