Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Three different formulations of the categorical imperative
Ethics around euthanasia
Ethics around euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Autonomy is independence or freedom, as of the will or one's actions (dictionary.com). Medical practices should be based on autonomy, beneficence, and justice. There are many arguments based on autonomy that favor against, favoring the aspects around the patient rather than the patient’s will. If a patient is in the final stages of an incurable disease, then respecting their autonomy at that point as an efficient value is more valuable than denying them in order to serve better interests in the remainder of their life, denying the only meaningful choice one would have left to make. Firstly, some argue that the decision to die is a social decision, and that it affects the healthcare team around them and undermines their autonomy. A person’s own life is independent from the government and medical staff in …show more content…
In Kantian ethics as well, euthanasia can be expressed positively. While we cannot justifiably trade an absolute value against interest-relative goods such as pain relief, since this would mean our prioritizing what is valuable to us over the value we carry in ourselves, making it non-universalizable violating the categorical imperative, “Act only in accordance with the maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law” (Sjöstrand, 2013). That said, if one applies another value such as dignity or autonomy, and in using the means of suicide, protects the deterioration of these that would offend those very values themselves, the practice becomes pursuit of an absolute and universal value that is congruent with the categorical imperative ” (Sjöstrand,
Autonomy is a concept found in moral, political, and bioethical reasoning. Inside these connections, it is the limit of a sound individual to make an educated, unpressured decision. Patient autonomy can conflict with clinician autonomy and, in such a clash of values, it is not obvious which should prevail. (Lantos, Matlock & Wendler, 2011). In order to gain informed consent, a patient
The concept of autonomy in the medical practice brings many different views. Autonomy is the ability individuals have to be self-governing. In these different views there exist two schools of thought, one is the belief that people are born with the ability to do what they want their body and no organization can tell them what to do with their body, like the government. On the other hand, some people believe that it is more complicated and conditional on mental competency so that person can make rational decisions. However, the majority of people seem to advocate for autonomy. A particular largely uncontroversial discussion arises with the case of Dax Cowart, who had his right to autonomy taken from him in a tragic accident and is therefore, an advocate for autonomy. As an ethics committee, we were to discuss this case in accord with four questions: can Dax Cowart refuse treatment, is no, why. If yes, then when could he be released, and if yes to the first question what would your decision be if Cowart asked for physician assisted suicide. I will be discussing the major points, consensus, and the reasons for the consensus from the committee. In addition, I will summarize the case and state my own opinion.
Autonomy is an important ethical principal that should be considered with great attention, especially with the limitation of personal autonomy one finds in hospitals. Burkhardt (2008) and Nathaniel define autonomy as self-governing and describe it as including four elements, the ability to determine personal goals, decide on a plan of action, to be respected, and to have freedom to act on choices. In John’s situation, his vulnerability in contrast to the power that the health care professionals hold over him put all four of these elements into jeopardy. Since his advance directive and his current choices differ, the matter of respec...
Alan Goldman argues that medical paternalism is unjustified except in very rare cases. He states that disregarding patient autonomy, forcing patients to undergo procedures, and withholding important information regarding diagnoses and medical procedures is morally wrong. Goldman argues that it is more important to allow patients to have the ability to make autonomous decisions with their health and what treatment options if any they want to pursue. He argues that medical professionals must respect patient autonomy regardless of the results that may or may not be beneficial to a patient’s health. I will both offer an objection and support Goldman’s argument. I will
The philosophers Kant and Aristotle both have their own theories on the source of virtuous action. Aristotle believes that the moral worth of an action lies in the agent's intent whereas Kant believes that if one's will is determined by inclination, neither does that individual have a good will nor does the action have any moral worth. Thus, in order for an action to have moral worth, according to Kant, one's will must be determined by categorical imperatives. Once this condition is satisfied, that person can be said to have a good will and the resulting action can potentially have moral worth. Kant and Aristotle's theories on the source of virtuous actions are highly similar as they both believe that intent is a crucial component of virtuous
There’s an argument on if euthanasia opposes the sanctity of life. Euthanasia has caused society to lose the respect for the sanctity of life. According to bbc.com, “There are four main reasons why people think we shouldn't kill human beings: All human beings are to be valued, irrespective of age, sex, race, religion, social status or their potential for achievement. Human life is a basic good as opposed to an instrumental good, a good in itself rather than as a means to an end. Human life is sacred because it's a gift from God. Therefore the deliberate taking of human life should be prohibited except in self-defence or the legitimate defence of others. The philosopher Immanuel Kant said that rational human beings should be treated as an end in themselves and not as a means to something else. The fact that we are human has value in itself. Our inherent value doesn't depend on anything else - it doesn't depend on whether we are having a good life that we enjoy, or whether we are making other people's lives better. We exist, so we have value. Most of us agree with that - though we don't put it in philosopher-speak. We say that we don't think that we should use other people - which is a plain English way of saying that we shouldn't treat other people as a means...
The document Declaration of Independence signed July 4, the year 1776 and written by one of the country’s ancestors Thomas Jefferson. It was a time in history that declared independence a manuscript written for this occasion which introduces five separate sections that include the introduction which states it is vital to take action on Britain for the colonies.
Autonomy is defined as “the right to make independent decisions concerning one’s own life and well being” which encompasses four main meanings describing autonomy as: “free action, effective deliberation, authenticity and moral reflection” (Yeo & Moorhouse, 1996, p.91-93). In the case of 59 year old Ms. R, who has stage IV metastatic lung cancer (Kirk, 2014), respecting her autonomy can be honored using three of the four autonomy principles; free action, effective deliberation and authenticity. Using autonomy as free action, defined as “being able to do what one wishes
“Man masters nature not by force but by understanding. This is why science has succeeded where magic failed: because it has looked for no spell to cast over nature”. From the beginning of time man and nature has been in conflict with one another because, as a whole, there is no cooperating. Each one tirelessly wants its way. The Man is fighting for dominance and nature w never yielding its authority. In American Literature, many authors illustrate this theme in their writing. Specifically the writers Jack London in The Law Of Life, Stephen Crane The Open Boat and Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Fin. Each explores the relationship between humans and nature but with slightly different methods. Mark Twain uses nature in a realistic way, Jack London in a naturalistic way and Stephen Crane constitutes a combination of both.
Personal autonomy refers to the capacity to think, decide and act on one's own free initiative (Patient confidentiality & divulging patient information to third parties, 1996). For a patient’s choice to be an autonomous choice, the patient must make his choice voluntarily (free of controlling constraints), his choice must be adequately informed, and the patient must have decision-making capacity (he must be competent) (Paola, 2010), therefore Physicians and family members should help the patient come to his own decision by providing full information; they should also uphold a competent, adult patient's decision, even if it appears medically wrong (Patient confidentiality & divulging patient information to third parties, 1996).
There are some arguments for assisted suicide, and respect for autonomy is one of them. A competent person should have the right to choose to live or die. Justice is another thing. Competent terminally ill patients are allowed to hasten their deaths by refusing medication. Physician assisted suicide may be a compassionate response to unbearable suffering.
The aim of the analysis is meant to clarify the meaning of the word autonomy thereby the introduction of a concept. Clarification is needed as the word autonomy does have several meanings and not all apply to medical terminology, some meanings span to philosophy, technology and general decision making. The medical meaning is significant in the care of patients for improved outcomes through choice and educated decision making on the part of the patient. Autonomy can be empowering as a concept or even as a single word.
According to Immanuel Kant, a person has dignity that makes him autonomous. Thus, the decision of the autonomous patient to die has intrinsic value. Because patients are rational agent, they are able to make their own decision based on reason. A rational patient will reason that if continued existence is full of suffering and no-hope for better well-being, therefore, the best option is to discontinue his/her life to save him/herself from that future condition. It is the patient’s approach to manage his/her own life. Dan W. Brock is right in his article “Voluntary Active Euthanasia” when he said that, “self-determination [or autonomy] has fundamental value… [because]… individual [can] control the manner, circumstances, and timing of their dying and death” (75). The dignity of the patient lies in their “capacity to direct their lives” (Brock 75).
What makes a good person good? According to WikiHow, "We should learn to define our own morals ourselves. One of the simplest ways to do so is to love others, and treat them as you would like to be treated. Try to think of others before yourself. Even doing small things daily will greatly enrich and improve your life, and the lives of others around you." This quote shows us what we need to do in order to be what society thinks as, “good". In order to be a good person, you have to do good and moral things in your society consistently. However people might think that by doing one good thing once in a while will automatically make you a “good person”, but in reality it doesn’t.
Autonomy is a principle that allows a patient or authorizing agent to make decisions regarding healthcare decisions without any outside influence (Burkhardt & Nathanial, 2014, p.440) As the nurse, it is important to understand