People are entitled to their own opinions, sometimes they think that something is beneficial for a person; however, according to other people it might not be. In “The Death Treatment”, some of Godelieva’s doctors thought that they are helping her to end her agony, and decided to assist her suicide. They believed that there was nothing else they could do to treat her and decided to assist her suicide. In my opinion, the doctors didn’t do everything in their power to help Godelieva; instead, they influenced her decision to do euthanasia by putting their views on her and this is the reason I believe that she should not have been euthanized. There were more treatments available to treat her depression rather than doing euthanasia.
Doctors like
…show more content…
He describes how the doctors can change the patient’s views and how they can shape them according to what they believe is right and that is what happened in Godelieva’s case. In “The Death Treatment”, Aviv writes about a doctor named Distelmans, who was the proponent for making euthanasia legal for people who have incurable diseases. She also mentions that Distelmans has euthanized hundreds of people and he gives talks at schools and hospitals and other events. Distelmans is influencing people to do euthanasia, even though there are other solutions and treatments available for these people to resolve their problems. Godelieva visited Distelmans and a few months later, she decided to file for euthanasia. Before meeting him, Godelieva was depressed; however, she didn’t have thoughts about ending her life as Aviv mentions that in her diary Godelieva wrote that, “She couldn’t comprehend why her husband would kill …show more content…
When doctors treat their patients they give their patients full autonomy about all the treatment options available and also the side effects related to the treatment, so that the patient can make a decision which would be most beneficial for them. In “The Death Treatment”, Aviv interviews Thienpont and writes that “Before approving for euthanasia, she doesn’t require patients to try procedures that they think are invasive” (62). Instead of informing and giving her patients all the treatment they need, Thienpont lets her patients proceed with euthanasia. A therapy called electroconvulsive therapy, which Godelieva never received, is effective for half of the patients with depression. One of the questions this raises is that why was she not given this treatment that had a fifty percent chance to cure her before getting euthanized? And also, did she even know that this treatment was available? And if she would have known about it then, how this would have shaped her decision to file for euthanasia. Aviv also writes that in her defense Thienpont says that “Sometimes its really too late. If the patient’s energy is gone, then it is not humane to say, ‘Well, maybe if you go to a hospital that specializes in your problem for two or more years, it will help.’ I
The flow and organization of the topics are structured chronologically and easy for readers to have a clear depiction of the progression of the book. He explains and elaborates his ideas and assumptions on struggles with morality, through real voices of patients and his own personal encounter. The first few topics were lighthearted, more on procedural terms such as the demographics of care in the United States and India and the evolution of care. This heightens to themes that are close to one’s heart as he uncovers the relationship amongst medicine, patient, and the family. It also deliberates on the concerns after medicine becomes impotent and society is ill-equipped for the aging population, which highlight the decisions and conversations one should or might have pertaining to death. He makes
The T-4 Euthanasia Program was set in motion with the pretense that it was merciful killing. The physicians were seen as men who were helping the poor victims of dieases die peacefully. However, many of those who were killed were mentally ill and therefore they were not going to die ...
Buddhists strongly disagree with the use of euthanasia. It is said that Buddha condemned any form of self-mortification. They believe that you should accept your suffering, as it is apart of life.
Euthanasia is a word derived from Greek that has the etymological meaning of an easy death through the alleviation of pain (Moreno, 1995). Through the course of history, the signification of the term has changed and evolved in many different definitions. A useful definition of euthanasia on which we will base this essay, is named ‘mercy killing’, which signifies deliberately putting an end to someone’s life to avoid further suffering, as stated by Michael Manning in 1998. The euthanasia debate possesses a strong significance in our modern society. A discussion conducted by both scholars and politicians is going on whether physicians have the right to hasten the death of an individual by the administration of poison. In this essay
There are many themes in this book such as teamwork, humanity, there is a silver lining in every storm, and no matter how bad things are everything will turn out okay, and the other theme is it is hard to tell who is the antagonist and who is the protagonist in the book. However the three most important are those that were just mentioned which are Thomas, Teresa, and the organization known as WICKED. The reason that all of these themes are important is that they share something in common with one another. Such as humanity and teamwork humans are one of the few creatures on this world that will work together to accomplish something. The other two also share that no matter how hard things get there's always been a way out of it.The next four paragraphs are meant to show how each one of the themes no matter how different they are, they each hold a little in common with each other.
During his twenties, he enrolled in graduate school, in chemistry, but instead of studying, he researched his father 's suicide. He took the train to Ghent, where his father had worked, and interviewed all his colleagues and friends. Until Godelieva 's death, his mother, Tom had never given much thought to euthanasia, though he was vaguely in favor of it. "Distelmans was just a voice he heard on the radio from time to time. When the euthanasia law passed, he and his wife assumed that the law was for senior citizens who were already dying (Aviv,
In conclusion, Euthanasia is “good death” and should result in that. Having a patient like Diane’s death should end in a non suffering way. Without having any pressure or being mislead and being pushed to dying and going completely against they’re autonomy. After you go against they’re autonomy that’s when other issues and conflicts are presented. They’re the voice of their own body and if one wishes, in good reasons and rational ones should be entitled to make a huge decision for their life.
Assisted- physician suicide also goes by many names such as euthanasia. 'Euthanasia' rings an enormous bell as the same structure used during the holocaust in the 1940s. The difference between now and then is the innocent lives lost because of their inc...
Death is a natural part of life that we all have to face one day. The way in which friends and love ones cope during this time is based on their culture or religious belief and their support system. Different religion or culture has different mourning customs which are unique to their own believes. For this project, three religious practices: Christianity, Muslim and Catholic were examined along with their own unique customs and believes. Despite the wide array of differences between each culture, they all believe in life after death and that there is a heaven and a hell.
Doctors prefer to never have to euthanize a patient. It is a contradiction of everything they have been taught for a doctor to euthanize someone, because a doctor’s job is to do everything in their power to keep the patient alive, not assist them in suicide. The majority of doctors who specialize in palliative care, a field focused on quality of life for patients with severe and terminal illnesses, think legalizing assisted suicide is very unnecessary. This is due to the fact that if patients do not kill themselves, they will end up dying on a ventilator in the hospital under the best possible care available, with people around them trying to keep them as comfortable as possible. Legalized euthanasia everywhere has been compared to going down a slippery slope. Officials believe that it could be done over excessively and the fear of assisted suicide numbers rising greatly is a great fear. This is why euthanasia is such a controversial subject worldwide. But, even though it is a very controversial subject, euthanasia is humane. Every doctor also has a say in whether or not they choose to euthanize a patient or not, leaving only the doctors who are willing to do this type of practice, for euthanizing patients. Medicine and drugs prescribed by a doctor for pain or suffering can not always help a person to the extent they desire, even with the help of doctors
Euthanasia is a serious political, moral and ethics issues in society. People either strictly forbid or firmly favor euthanasia. Terminally ill patients have a fatal disease from which they will never recover, many will never sleep in their own bed again. Many beg health professionals to “pull the plug” or smother them with a pillow so that they do not have to bear the pain of their disease so that they will die faster. Thomas D. Sullivan and James Rachels have very different views on the permissibility of active and passive euthanasia. Sullivan believes that it is impermissible for the doctor, or anyone else to terminate the life of a patient but, that it is permissible in some cases to cease the employment of “extraordinary means” of preserving
Critics to the idea of providing dying patients with lethal doses, fear that people will use this type those and kill others, “lack of supervision over the use of lethal drugs…risk that the drugs might be used for some other purpose”(Young 45). Young explains that another debate that has been going on within this issue is the distinction between killings patients and allowing them die. What people don’t understand is that it is not considered killing a patient if it’s the option they wished for. “If a dying patient requests help with dying because… he is … in intolerable burden, he should be benefited by a physician assisting him to die”(Young 119). Patients who are suffering from diseases that have no cure should be given the option to decide the timing and manner of their own death. Young explains that patients who are unlikely to benefit from the discovery of a cure, or with incurable medical conditions are individuals who should have access to either euthanasia or assisted suicide. Advocates agreeing to this method do understand that choosing death is a very serious matter, which is why it should not be settled in a moment. Therefore, if a patient and physician agree that a life must end and it has been discussed, and agreed, young concludes, “ if a patient asks his physician to end his life, that constitutes a request for
The society in Lois Lowry’s book The Giver is like a freshly printed newspaper every page is crisp and clean, but when a page is crumpled or stained the only solution is to remove it. Problems in the town are created and solved by the same cause, euthanasia. Euthanasia, in the book, is used on multiple types of people; the young who would create problems for the society; the old; and anyone who threatens the order and structure of the place. The leaders euthanize people to protect their community. Usually in situations where many suffer and only one or few benefit, it is whoever is in charge that gets blamed, but since the rulers of the society are just as unaware as the people, it is the creators of the society that are at fault.
When Elizabeth Warner, stage 4 cancer patient, decides to take the pill that will end her life, are her children sitting there thinking about how she will finally be out of suffering; or wondering for the rest of their lives if miracles do happen, that would have allowed for their children to have a grandmother? Over the years, there has been much controversy as to whether or not euthanasia should be legal or not. Through evidence, it is clear that the morals behind this concept are just simply wrong. It allows for a large gap of abuse through poor influence from doctors, family members, and suffering from severe depression. Though it may appear that making this practice legal, it is preventing people from committing the illegal crime of suicide,
The article talks about Godeliva, a woman who had been battling depression for more than 40 years of her life and her final decision to end her life with the help of Dr. Wim Distelman, a professor of palliative medicine and oncologist. He was one of the main advocates for the 2002 law that permitted euthanasia in Belgium that gave patients the right to choose their fate if they had incurable diseases that caused them unbearable