Untimely Death
Death, is it okay to let a suffering person die, or should doctors give them a lethal
injection to end their suffering? Many people have different views on this situation, but I believe
that it is the patients decision because the patient knows how much pain they are in, and if they
can not take it any longer. In the essay "Active and Passive Euthanasia" James Rachels wrote
that he thinks that it is a better choice morally to withdraw life support, and let a person die,
rather than ending a persons life through other means.
I do not believe that if a patient is about to die, and that patient makes a request to
withhold treatment that the doctor should withhold it. To me that is going to make the patient
suffer even more than he already is, so I believe that the doctor should either continue giving the
patient their treatment, or ask if they would like to have their life terminated with a lethal
infection.
I also believe that the patients immediate family should have a say in what happens.
Let's say that the patient has been in a coma for several months, and the only thing that is
keeping the patient alive is a life support system, then the family should have the choice on if
they want the patient to live or die. I also believe that the family should choose, if the patient is
alive, but he is going through tremendous suffering, and if the patient is aware of thing, but isn't
responding to the things around him.
I believe that withholding treatment from a patient is wrong, because in a way that is like
slowly murdering that person. If you withhold treatment from a patient they are going to go
through probably more pain or sufferi...
... middle of paper ...
...so
think that it is wrong to withhold treatment from a patient, and make the patient suffer even
more. I also think that it is wrong to let a newborn baby wither to die, because that child should
have a chance to live, and to be all it can be. In the long run I think that doctor's should do what
is morally right, and let the suffering patient keep receiving treatments, until they die, but
sometimes it is too much for the patient to take, and so I believe that it is the patients choice. I
disagree with James Rachels essay, because I think that it is kind of like a cruel and unusual
punishment to withdraw treatments from a patient. I believe that if a patient is ready to die that
their treatment should not be withheld, the doctor's should either keep giving the patient
treatments, or take other measures to end the patients life.
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
Patients seek relief from symptoms such as unremitting severe pain, breathing difficulties such as choking and suffocation, nausea and vomiting. When a patient refuses treatment or is taken off of it they will endure endless amounts of pain and suffering before they actually die. If the patient is given lethal medication, the death would be much swifter and peaceful. Euthanasia in Greek means “painless, happy death” as stated in http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/articles/commentary-case-against-physician-assisted-suicide-right-end-life-care. Patients feel as if their bodies are turning against them. They realize they cannot eat, drink, or even go to the bathroom by themselves. Patient’s whose lungs are failing have to be hooked up to a breathing tube acquiring massive doses of morphine for weeks to ease the pain until they pass. This is no different than PSA only the patient wouldn’t have to suffer as long. On the other hand physical pain is not the only form of suffering. One must take in to consideration the patient’s mental health. When the patient knows they are going to die and they understand more pain and suffering are to come the more humane way would be to let the patient choose to die peacefully. Also a patient that is psychologically suffering could decide to end their lives themselves in a non-peaceful manner. Doctors can allow the patient to end the
On the other hand, patients can refuse treatment for their terminal condition, in which case physicians offer palliative or therapeutic treatment to relieve them of pain and stress.
Patients are ultimately responsible for their own health and wellbeing and should be held responsible for the consequences of their decisions and actions. All people have the right to refuse treatment even where refusal may result in harm to themselves or in their own death and providers are legally bound to respect their decision. If patients cannot decide for themselves, but have previously decided to refuse treatment while still competent, their decision is legally binding. Where a patient's views are not known, the doctor has a responsibility to make a decision, but should consult other healthcare professionals and people close to the patient.
own will or suicide be a moral act? What about a patient that is suffering from
...d how these determinations effect a physician’s approach to various types of critically ill patients? These types of questions come in to play when one attempts to critically analyze the differences between the types of terminally ill patients and the subtle ethical/legal nuances between withholding and withdrawing treatment. According to a review by Larry Gostin and Robert Weir about Nancy Cruzan, “…courts examine the physician’s respect for the desires of the patient and the level of care administered. A rule forbidding physicians from discontinuing a treatment that could have been withheld initially will discourage doctors from attempting certain types of care and force them prematurely to allow a patient to die. Physicians must be free to exercise their best professional judgment, especially when facing the sensitive question of whether to administer treatment.”
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.
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. It can get extremely hard and stressful that all the patients can think about doing is ending it, this alternative gives the patient a painless option. According to Somerville (2009), ¨… respect for people's rights to autonomy and self determination means everyone has a right to die at a time of their choosing¨ ( p.4). The patient deserves to choose whether they want to keep fighting or if they cannot go any farther. The patient should not have to push through a fight they have been fighting and know they cannot win. According to Kevorkian ¨the patient decides when it's best to go.¨ Nobody tells the patient when they have to end their lives, they understand their body and know
In closing, despite all of the different opinions that people have on PAS, there are many good outcomes that come with the decision. Having the right to make a “choice” is what PAS comes down to. Many argue that it is inhumane, while many will argue that it is a choice. If choosing PAS as a last dying right, then one should respect that choice. It is a choice and only the patient should have the right to choose.
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.
Giving a patient this option not only allows him or her to abstain from unnecessary pain, but it also allows the patient to die a dignified death. Colleges of the Boston College Law School Faculty Papers explain their views on assisted suicided to readers expressing, “We believe that it is reasonable to provide relief from suffering for patients who are dying or whose suffering is so severe that it is beyond their capacity to bear…The most basic values that support and guide all health care decision-making, including decisions about life-sustaining treatment, are the same values that provide the fundamental basis for physician-assisted suicide: promoting patients’ well-being and respecting their self-determination or autonomy”. The contributing authors make an excellent point stating the same values that are used in prolonging an individual 's life are the same used in assisted dying. Nonetheless, the majority of the United States remains opposed to assisted dying ignoring the individual’s mental, physical, and emotional pain he or she has undergone.With that in mind, this law also ignores the trauma close family members endure witnessing his or her loved ones face such an undesirable
I personally feel that the life of a person is well above all policies and regulations and if an attempt to rescue him or her from death at the right time remains unfulfilled, it is not the failure of a doctor or nurse, it is the failure of the entire medical and health community.
If a patient is suffering intolerable pain day and night with no way of being cure shouldn’t they be allowed to end their lives by a legal law. Being put through ineffective medical treatments should not be encourage to terminally ill patients persuading them that they will be cure when they will only be prolonging their dying process. A patient who requests to be euthanized from suffering agony should be terminated upon request because it would e inhumane for some one to continue to be in pain. When a patient is at this point in his terminal illness doctors should be allowed to grant their patients whatever they desire to do with their lives. If a patient does not want to go living the suffering lifestyle he is forced to live in to get through a day a doctor can grant the patient their last wish. As human beings we have the right to decide what is best for our own life. If you were in the shoes of a person who is suffering of pain both day and night, would you go along with the therapies’ doctors offer you even though they will not be curing you but stretching your days more of suffering until you finally die. Why would you want to be tied down to a bed with machines all over your entire both just so you can be artificially alive? There is no point on holding onto something that is basically gone already. This is why
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
Withdrawing Treatment, where like you stop the machine which is keeping the person alive or