Karen Ann Quinlan Case: The Case Of The Euthanasia

1254 Words3 Pages

For euthanasia to be effective when legalized, restrictions need to be applied. All of the states that have legalized physician assisted suicide have strict controls over who is eligible for it. A patient must be at least 18 years of age, have six or less months to live, have requested for euthanasia two times at least 15 days apart with the addition of a witness and written request, be a resident of the state, and be capable of making own decisions (ProCon.org 1). These strict requirements allow euthanasia to be abused less, while still benefiting those who are terminally ill. An abundance of the euthanasia debate deals with ethics. Active euthanasia and physician assisted suicide is seen as murder, and murder is seen as unethical and wrong. …show more content…

On April 15, 1975, the Quinlan family received a tragic phone call at approximately 2am; their daughter, Karen Ann, was in a coma. Earlier that evening, Quinlan was at a party and consumed drugs and alcohol. She became unconscious and eventually fell into an irreversible coma. She was conditioned to be in a persistent vegetative state. Since she was unable to recover from her coma, Quinlan’s parents requested her life support to be withheld. The removal of life support was more complicated than what the Quinlan family imagined it to be. They had to take the case to court to have the request approved. The first round in Superior court, the Quinlans lost. Eventually, the family took the case to the New Jersey Supreme Court. The court ruled that Quinlan’s father is appointed as her guardian and can make any decision regarding her care. It took the family over a year to have the approval to remove their daughter from life support; it took five days for Karen Ann Quinlan to be weaned off her respirator. Miraculously, she was able to breathe on her own for the next nine years until she died of pneumonia. This case led to the creation of the “living will” and required medical institutions to allow patients to live their last stage in life with dignity and respect (Karen Ann Quinlan Hospice …show more content…

Haiselden allowed a blue, deformed baby boy to die rather than performing surgery. On November 12, 1915, Anna Bollinger gave birth to a blue and badly deformed baby. A litany of physical defects were diagnosed for the baby boy. Dr. Harry Haiselden predicted that without surgery, the baby would die soon; however, Haiselden advised against surgery. “During a news conference, Haiselden announced he would ‘merely stand by passively’ and ‘let nature complete its bungled job’” (ProCon.org 1). The baby died after only living for five days. By declining to operate, Haiselden managed to accomplish what other defenders of euthanasia before him could not. More people than ever before started talking about the debate as a result of being inspired by Haiselden. People spoke out in favor of letting deformed infants die for the good of society. This case increased public support of euthanasia, and almost half of Americans had begun to believe that the mercy killing of infants born permanently deformed or mentally handicapped was

Open Document