Ethical And Legal Implications Of Euthanasia Essay Example for Free

Ethical And Legal Implications Of Euthanasia Essay The term euthanasia is derived from the Greek words â€Å"eu† which means good and â€Å"thanatos† which means death. Hence the literal translation of euthanasia is good death. Majority of countries around the world has prohibited euthanasia yet particular countries and states still apply this concept without much regard to the laws governing this issue. Unfortunately, cases of euthanasia still flourish because the physician conducting euthanasia is often left unharmed. Among all the countries around the world, the Netherlands has been identified as the prime country that allows the application of euthanasia in hospital cases. The topic of euthanasia is a controversial topic in human health. Euthanasia has been associated with medical issues, as well as ethical, legal, cultural and religious issues. Euthanasia has been originally defined as a method of accelerating death of a patient in order for the patient to avoid additional pain and misery due to his current medical condition. Since this classical definition is very sketchy, it is important that the different forms of euthanasia be described in detail. Voluntary euthanasia pertains to the hastening of death based on the consent that has been provided by the patient. It is a common situation in voluntary euthanasia that the patient signifies his wish to end his life because of the hardships he is currently experiencing as a consequence of his medical illness and another individual accomplishes euthanasia to fulfill the patient’s wishes. In the case of involuntary euthanasia, the patient remains competent is signifying his wishes and even decide what he wants to happen to himself, but euthanasia is still performed on the patient without even discussing this option with him. There are also cases wherein the patient is not able to express his wishes because he has lost his ability to communicate and non-voluntary euthanasia is conducted on the patient. The loss of ability to communicate is often observed among adult patients who are in a comatose or mentally deficient condition. The condition of not being able to communicate may also be observed among newborn babies that have congenital anomalies. There are also different forms of euthanasia that is based on how it is conducted. Active euthanasia pertains to the accelerating of the death process through the act of injecting a toxic substance that would result in death of the patient. Passive euthanasia, on the other hand, refers to euthanasia that involves the removal of treatment or the refusal in providing treatment to the patient. This type of euthanasia entails giving up the use of any life support systems or treatments and reflects an individual’s intention that the patient die after soon after the act is performed. The word passive often confuses the public because the word connotes not performing any particular act but the phrase passive euthanasia technically means the induction of death through the removal of supportive systems to the patient. Several other phrases have been used interchangeably to denote euthanasia. These are physician-assisted suicide of killing, withholding treatment, mercy killing or medical futility. In physician-assisted suicide, the medical practitioner supplies the patient with a lethal substance which the patient himself administers on himself in order to end his life (Materstvedt et al. 2003). In the case of withholding life-sustaining treatment, the physician attending to the patient decides that the use of further medical equipment and medications will not benefit the patient. In addition, the decision of withholding life-sustaining treatment is also based on the patient’s and the family’s request. Most of the hospital cases that withhold life-sustaining treatment are also futile in terms of medical procedures and treatments. There is much controversy with regards to the use of euthanasia around the world. It has been reported that majority of the physicians would support the authorization of euthanasia in medical practice. Particular countries and states have actually rejection or overturned earlier promulgations that are related to the conduct of euthanasia. In Australia, the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act was disallowed in 1997. In the state of Oregon in the United States, the Oregon Death and Dignity Act was discarded in 1999 (Miller et al. , 2004). These Acts were denied based on a number of ethical implications. One of the major issues related to euthanasia is that the suffering of the patient was not alleviated correctly. It has been pointed out that there is a possibility that the appropriate palliative care was not provided to the patient hence the patient would experience pain and discomfort. The availability of euthanasia thus influences the decisions of the physician wherein the physician would not look into the patient’s condition in detail because he is aware that there will always be the option of performing euthanasia in case the patient does not feel better as soon as expected. It is also possible that the amount of pain medications were below the optimal concentration that would be needed to eradicate the pain the patient is experiencing. There are also instances when a patient with a terminally ill condition is also suffering from a second medical disorder. Co-morbidities often occur with cancer patients, wherein they also suffer from major depression or another form of mental health disorder. Clinical research has also showed that patients with terminally ill conditions are more likely to request euthanasia in order to end of his suffering and frustration. It is thus important to determine whether the suffering of a patient continues due to patient negligence or mainly due to the illness itself. Another ethical issue related to euthanasia is that patients generally change their mind with regards to their requested treatment and wishes during the course of their ailment. It has been observed that among the patients who initially request for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, only approximately one-third of the patients remained with their decision of using euthanasia. As for the rest of the patients, they eventually changed their minds with regards to requesting euthanasia because an alternative method was provided to them that changed their perception of their terminal conditions. The alternative option actually made their conditions and current lives tolerable and still worth living. If euthanasia were legalized, it would be a great loss to the human population to see a significant number of patients that would instantly resort to giving up their lives just because of the idea that there is suffering and pain due to their illness. The value of life is also questioned in the act of euthanasia. Christianity has taught that only God will provide and take away life hence any person does not have the right to end an individual’s life, regards of his medical condition or state. The ethical issue of the patient’s and the physician’s rights to life are also questioned in euthanasia. In the medical Oath of Hippocrates, it is stated that a physician will do no harm to the patient and this should not be confused with the patient’s decision to die because this does not automatically mean that the physician has the right to kill the patient that signified his intent to receive euthanasia. The slippery slope phenomenon has been strongly linked with the issue of euthanasia, resulting in the need for a thorough sociological review of the act. Initial cases that employed euthanasia often involved hastening death among terminally ill patients. Euthanasia is secondarily provided to patients diagnosed to be chronically ill. The slippery slope phenomenon pertains to the application of euthanasia on other medical cases that show vague definitions with regards to futility and recovery. These medical conditions include the persistent vegetative state, which involves a patient that had undergone an episode of coma and then reawakened with a destructed brain stem. A patient in a persistent vegetative state thus presents with the inability to communicate but is actually conscious and can only perform the gag reflex. The persistent vegetative state is an exception to the definition of brain death, because only one of the two major components of the central nervous system is affected by the condition. Brain death has been classically defined as the shutting down of the entire central nervous system, including the cerebral cortex and the brain stem, resulting in the loss of breathing and stoppage of beating of the heart. In the case of persistent vegetative state, the patient remains awake yet has lost the capacity to perform any other motor activities. If euthanasia were legalized, this would provide physicians and family members of the patient an option to decide on whether it is right to end the life of a patient if he is in a persistent vegetative state. Other patients suffering from AIDS would also be given a quick solution to get away from their suffering of AIDS-related complications and would not learn to live the rest of their lives with AIDS. It is also alarming to imagine that if euthanasia were legalized, any elderly person may be subjected to euthanasia in order to circumvent the responsibility of caring for a senior individual. The issue of euthanasia also affects the patient’s trust in a physician. These medical professionals have long been perceived as skilled individuals that have a great knowledge in saving and prolonging the life of an individual. It is thus a normal implication that these medical professionals also have the expertise in hastening and terminating the life of an individual should he be asked to perform this or should he decide that ending a life of a person is the right thing to do. Hence if euthanasia is legalized, patients would feel that the physician carries the option of whether he shall or shall not live. Another sociological issue related to euthanasia is that the patient may be pressured to decide on euthanasia because of his family’s treatment on him (Ganzini et al. 2002). If euthanasia were legalized, any patient that feels that his illness is becoming a burden to his family members may easily pick the option of euthanasia to avoid the disappointment and anguish that his family is experiencing due to his illness. As for other elderly patients who are chronically or terminally ill, they would rather avoid being a burden to their families hence they would most likely request for euthanasia. Euthanasia is also implicated with sociological issues such as the eradication of unwanted ethnic groups. The historical incident of the mass murder of Jews by the Nazis during World War II is an extreme example of the use of euthanasia. The decision to eradicate Jews was then a political move that was performed using a medical procedure. The incident of mass murdering of Jews by the German Nazis is also strongly associated with the concept of eugenics, or the biased selection of individuals that are allowed or accepted by society. Eugenics has also been linked with the eradication of criminals in society during the earlier centuries.

The Slums :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Being raised in the slums of New York City there were not many role models for me to take after. At seventeen years old, I dropped out of school to pursue my only chance of success; long distance running. My dream would be to win the marathon that will be held in Chicago next month. If I win this race, I will receive $50,000 and hopefully a contract with Nike. There is only one problem that I face; there are a few women that are faster than I am. I am in constant training, and I have placed amongst the top ten women in the Boston Marathon, but I have never won a major race. How am I going to win when there are other people that can out run me?   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  While I was talking to one of my friends, who happens to be an athletic trainer, I told her of my worries. She informed me that there is a new experimental drug that can help to improve my endurance by preventing the build up of lactic acid in my muscles, and she had access to these pills. The drug has not yet been tested on humans, yet when animals were given the drug they had no series side effects. My friend offered me a one months sampling of the drug in return for $5000 if I win the race and nothing if I loose. She swore to me that it is not on the list of drugs that are banned and it will not show up on a blood test. What should I do?   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The main issue that I ask myself is whether or not I should take the drugs. All of my life I have dreamed of being an Olympic runner and if I take these pills I may get my chance. These pills can help build up my muscles and endurance which will give me a better chance of taking home the gold. If these pills do work than I will be able to take the $50,000 I win and move myself out of this hole I am living in. If I am in a better environment, I may want to do something with myself; perhaps I could get my GED and take college courses. If I take these pills, I could possibly be the best runner there ever could be.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  On the contrary, I have also come up with the down sides of taking these pills.

Utilitarianism and Abortion

Abortion is one of the most debated issues across the globe. People from different sects of the society have their own perception on the abortion. Some try to prove it morally wrong and illegal while others justify abortion on several grounds. There is no need to say that people have their arguments in favor as well as in against the abortion and both the views seem to be right in specific circumstances. Apart from different opinions, law of a society has its own views on the issue which cannot be ignored.This paper intends to discuss the issue of abortion along with examining what utilitarian scholars think on the abortion and several other related issues. Utilitarian view on abortion While examining the utilitarian’s view about abortion one should mull over the ethical aspect of the issue with perspective of greatest happiness. Utilitarian view believes that ethical value of any act is determined by the maximum amount of happiness of biggest quality for hugest number of gene ral population which it creates.John Stuart mill on abortion John Stuart mill is known as father of utilitarian view and it is not possible to understand the issue in Toto without seeing his view on the issue of abortion. John Stuart mill in his book utilitarianism, writes â€Å"Utility, or the Greatest Happiness principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure†.The idea given by John Stuart mill is popularly known as principle of greatest happiness. Right and wrong aspects of any action are decided on the basis of pleasure and pain in this principle of john Stuart mill. Happiness and pain are determined as per quality and amount in every incident though it is not that for easy to test the things unless someone has tested the amount of both pleasure and pain. John Stuart mill says that it is good to be an unsatisfied human being rather than a satisfied pig and it is good to be unsatisfied Socrates than a satisfied fool.If a fool or a pig has different opinions, it is just because both of them know only their own aspects of the issue but others who are there for the comparison are acquainted with both the sides. In the light of above findings, it is difficult for the john Stuart mill to take any firm position on the issue of abortion because he, on no account experienced the excellence and amount of happiness which comes from every one situation. Though it good to suggest that mill would have made his stand by analyzing it and comparing the same with the principle of greatest happiness.Application of utilitarian theory We analyze the issue of abortion in different situations and the first one is extreme pro life position which says that abortion is unethical and should be considered illegal in all the situations. People who believe in this theory end orse the opinion that fetus is a human being irrespective of its development. Greatest principle of happiness suggests that utilitarian theory does not endorse this view because as per this principle many people may be happy or unhappy by the decision of abortion but it is the mother whose opinion or pleasure matters.Another scenario suggests that abortion is immoral but when life of a mother is in danger, it should be allowed. This view suggests that a mother’s life is more valuable because of her future ability to bear the child. Utilitarian theory does not endorse such theories because greatest principle of happiness suggests that abortion does not make most people very happy. In the third scenario, abortion is considered illegal because except in the exceptional situation of rape. When a female is raped and becomes pregnant then she should be allowed to abortion because sex was not pre planned.Utilitarian would probably grant their consent for abortion, considering the ex ceptional situation of such cases. People who consider abortion illegal forget about the rights of the women who are pregnant. They may consider it offending and unnecessary interfering in their personal life if they are prevented or advised to not receive abortion. Utilitarian theory also supports this view on the basis of greatest happiness principle. A complete different scenario on the abortion is that it is absolutely moral and legal because it is the discretion of the  woman to decide about her body and she should have the right of abortion if she considers it good for her.Utilitarian theory would probably have no any problem with this view because of the greatest happiness principle. Mill believes in individual’s rights and advocates for such discretions upon own life. Conclusion After having observed the above mentioned detailed analysis of the subject, it is good to conclude that utilitarian theory advocates for the individual rights and further believes in the pri nciple of greatest happiness. Utilitarian view criticizes abortion in very rare and exceptional cases where this is sheer wrong.Utilitarian point of view endorses abortion on the basis of personal life, individual rights and principle of greatest happiness. John Stuart mill opinion about abortion is based on the principle of human’s greatest happiness. Mill suggests that an individual should always be at liberty to decide the things that give him greatest happiness. Abortion or any other issue should be decided by the individuals according to their own situation and interests, mill suggests. Mill’s opinion is widely appreciated and followed in North American countries in modern times as his views advocate for the human rights and liberty in a greater amount.

The Atlantic Sun Conference - Learn About the 8 Members