Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical dilemma in medical
Ethics and decision making process
Ethics and decision making process
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethical dilemma in medical
The prohibition against taking human life is based on fundamental and deeply held ethical and religious convictions. In this essay I will discuss the options available for the doctors, and whether they are able to stop the treatment of Sadia, and if so, the ethical issues will arise as a result of this. "Dying is an integral part of living... the right to die with dignity should be as well protected as is any other aspect of the right to life. State prohibitions that would force a dreadful, painful death on a rational but incapacitated terminally ill patient are an affront to human dignity." In addition to this, choosing the manner of death could be included as an aspect of right to life but interests of the state and society will justify interference with it, as seen in the case of Pretty v UK. To suggest to produce a single definition of death with medical intervention is impossible and perhaps undesirable given that there is appropriate justification for all of the approaches advocated. The legal definition of death comes from the case of Airedale NHS Trust v Bland which established that brain stem death was the definition of death for the purposes of medical law. Ford argues that the right to die embodies a critical paradox of personhood, which consists of consciousness, self awareness and the ability to engage with others. Harris, however, argues that there is no personhood paradox because the criteria is set out from capacities which make it possible for the person to value their own existence. People have different views about the right to die depending on their own ethical rationale, thus this is why it is difficult to determine when somebody has the right to die or not as everybody has conflicting views in society.... ... middle of paper ... ...o decide. They will have to consider Sadia's welfare as paramount but with consideration to the ethical issues mentioned above. It is unlikely that Sadia will develop and become better with the support provided but the judge could decide that they should maintain her life but being required to provide this support may be an endorsement of the status quo. So, in order to maintain the doctors' integrity the decision could allow the doctors to refuse treatment if doctors feel that they cannot conscientiously administer treatment because of the quality of life of the infant. Their views, therefore, deserve respect, but should not necessarily be conclusive. Where the child's future is utterly bleak and the doctors conclude that there is no benefit in continuing treatment, then the treatment can be withheld, even if the consequence of doing so is that the child will die.
...s driven by non-maleficence, or the intent to “do no harm”. They know that withholding treatment for religious beliefs will potentially be fatal to both. While Maria is acting out of loyalty to her religious beliefs, the medical staff is acting out of loyalty to the patient’s well being and that of her unborn child. It would be unfair if no party were acting on behalf of that child. In conclusion, providers in this case must pursue every option in delivering life saving treatment for this child. This may involve legal action. If it were just Maria providers may attempt to influence her decision, but ultimately it would be up to her to refuse suggested treatment. Since her decision affects the life of the baby providers are called upon to save that child .
There are many convincing and compelling arguments for and against Physician Assisted Suicide. There are numerous different aspects of this issue, including religious, legal and ethical issues. However, for the purpose of this paper, I will examine the ethical concerns of both sides. There are strong pro and con arguments regarding this, and I will make a case for both. It is definitely an issue that has been debated for years and will continue to be debated in years to come.
However, the framework in practice is very complex, and has various inconsistencies, such as the legality of refusing treatment, the sovereignty of a living will and the issue of prosecuting those who assist someone to end their lives. There is evidence that shows doctors using palliative sedation as a means to facilitate death in patients that are in extreme pain and the use of limiting or even stopping treatment at the patient’s request is not uncommon. The difficulties of putting the law into practice make it extremely difficult for courts, legislators and doctors to reach clear decisions on individual cases. Therefore, the inconsistencies in the legal framework need to be addressed, as with these present the argument against legalising the right to die is weakened. Legalising assisted dying would simplify the framework and ensure that set barriers and safeguards could be created in order to protect the patient and his/her
In the Netherlands, courts have begun to permit the administration of lethal injections to terminally ill patients (Jacoby 101). To many people, this is a barbaric practice. To others, it is the only humane thing to do. When a person is dying of a terminal illness with no hope of recovery, that person should be allowed to die if they wish. Deliberately keeping them alive to endure the pain and suffering of their illness is the barbaric practice. If they wish death, death should be given to them. Activists for the "Right to Life" don't stop to consider the right to die. I believe that the Right to Die is as sacred a right as the Right to Life. People ...
The definition of euthanasia is simple: "Easy, painless death." But the concept of euthanasia proposed by adherents of the euthanasia movement is complex and has profound consequences for all. Because the subject involves the discipline of medicine (diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, medical ethics and so on) as well as the discipline of law, the general public will have difficulty understanding it without some knowledge of these matters.
The criteria or definition of brain death was re-examined in 1968 by a committee at Harvard Medical School and is part of the criteria used today. They defined it as when a patient; is unresponsive to stimulus; cannot move or breathe without the aid of a ventilator and has no brain stem reflexes. Several tests are done in order to determine if a patient meets these criteria and this can be done by physicians and neurologists. A brain dead patient is legally dead and a death cer...
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...
Physician -assisted suicide has been a conflict in the medical field since pre- Christian eras, and is an issue that has resurfaced in the twentieth century. People today are not aware of what the term physician assisted suicide means, and are opposed to listening to advocates’ perspectives. Individuals need to understand that problems do not go away by not choosing to face them. This paper’s perspective of assisted suicide is that it is an option to respect the dignity of patients, and only those with deathly illness are justified for this method.
There are two methods of carrying out euthanasia, the first one is active and the second one is passive. Active euthanasia means the physicians deliberately take actions which cause the death of the patients, for example, the injection of sedatives in excess amount. Passive euthanasia is that the doctors do not take any further therapies to keep the ill patients alive such as switching off the life supporting machines [1]. This essay argues that the legalization of the euthanasia should not be proposed nowadays. It begins by analyzing the problem that may cause in relation to the following aspects: ‘slippery slope’ argument, religious view, vulnerable people and a rebuttal against the fair distribution of medical resources. This essay concludes that the legalization of the voluntary euthanasia brings more harm than good.
Islam has definite views on euthanasia, and this essay will bring to the fore all of the main beliefs relevant to the issue of euthanasia/assisted suicide. Islam spells things out quite plainly, with enough similes to clarify every point in the system of beliefs.
Death is something inevitable which all human beings must have to face today or tomorrow, or some part of their life.There are many people around the world sinking their lives in the darkness of dignity. Each and every day individuals all throughout the U.S. are diagnosed with terminal illness. They are compelled to wait until they die naturally, at the same time their bodies deteriorate by their sickness that will eventually take their lives. Some of the time, this implies living excruciating pain ,and that most states in our nation cannot do anything about it legally. People should have the will to live or die as the death of dignity is one of those acts that promotes this behavior , as a result it should be legalized all over the states,
The definition of death is crucial for the benefit of the person, their family, and those who wait for organs. The first definition, the total stoppage of the circulation of the blood, and cessation of vital functions such as the heart and lungs. Cardiopulmonary considers the state of deep irreversible unconsciousness life and disregards the necessity of organs (Pojman 101). Thus, the second definition is declaring death despite vital signs like cardiopulmonary death—whole brain death concludes the cerebrum (higher brain) and brainstem (lower brain) losing function is the end of life (Pojman 102). Similarly, it involves the death of an organism. Indifference, it allows for functioning organs to be harvested before being damaged by time and it limits the definition of life. The final
Death occurs when an individual has sustained irreversible sessation of all functions of the entire brain. A number of definitions of this term have been proposed, but a simple and accurate is “that disease, injury or event, but for which death would not have occurred at the time it did.” In death certification, it is of primary reason to find out the first insult that started a cascading series of events leading to death. This isreferred to as the cause of death. The physiologic derangements caused by the cause of death are reffered as mechanism of death. For instance, suppose an individual receives a gunshot wound that injures the spinal cord and renders the victim quadriplegic. If, years later, he or she succumbs to a urinary tract infection
a) Euthanasia refers to the painless and deliberate killing of an individual who is suffering from an incurable and painful disease or are in a permanent coma. There are two types of euthanasia, compulsory and voluntary. Compulsory Euthanasia refers to when other people decide when a person’s life will end. Voluntary Euthanasia is when the individual him/her self decide when to die.
As was discussed, death is defined as the irreversible cessation of cardiopulmonary or brain function, yet there are still critics who argue against cardiopulmonary death parameters (the two minute rule), and question the possibility of resuscitation and how that can be considered death. Furthermore, critics argued against the complete loss of brain function as a definitive characteristic of death while rebuttals revealed personhood as too ambiguous to define death. Aside from death, there was no definition of life, but controversies between philosophical, theological, and scientific viewpoints on when life begins and when moral status can be given to a being were explored.