In the article, Ethics & Life’s Ending: An Exchange, Dr. Robert D. Orr discusses the moral debate about the use or non-use of feeding tubes. Feeding tubes, a medical intervention designed to provide essential nutrition to individuals unable to eat or drink independently, often spark complex ethical discussions within the healthcare community and society. While they can be a lifeline for some patients, offering a means to sustain life and alleviate suffering, the decision to use them raises critical questions. Advocates argue for their selective use in specific conditions where they offer clear benefits, while challengers raise concerns about their uses. Thus, an understanding of when feeding tubes are appropriate becomes vital for necessary …show more content…
Introducing foreign objects into the body can disrupt the natural balance and increase susceptibility to infections. While that may be the case, proper nutrition plays a fundamental role in supporting the body’s healing processes, and feeding tubes offer a reliable means to deliver essential nutrients, vitamins, and fluids directly to patients, aiding in their recovery and improving their prognosis. To emphasize, patients that can’t adequately take in fluids and other nutrients by themselves, but who have a condition that by itself will not soon lead to death, can be kept alive with the simple use of tube feedings to get the essential nutrients and fluids needed. On the other hand, opponents highlight the potential risks of feeding tubes and how it may further diminish the patient’s quality of life. Some may question the ethical implications of prolonging life artificially in situations where death is inevitable, suggesting that such interventions may merely delay the inevitable and prolong the process of dying. Overall, when used justly and in appropriate situations, feeding tubes can serve as a necessary tool in the health and well-being of …show more content…
To explain further, feeding tubes in a person with advanced cognitive impairment may be annoying and uncomfortable for them, and they may not understand the intended purpose of the feeding tube. In which he or she may react by trying to remove it. However, feeding tubes don’t erase a person’s independence, but rather serve as a supplemental means of nutrition and hydration when oral intake becomes challenging or impossible for them. While feeding tubes may alter the way nutrition is received, feeding tubes do not remove the fundamental structure and function of the body. Therefore, the use of feeding tubes should be viewed as a supportive intervention that balances, rather than replaces, the inherent anatomy of the individual, aiming to optimize their nutritional status and overall well-being. Furthermore, there is ethical consideration for medical uselessness. In cases where patients have irreversible conditions or are in the terminal stages of illness, the use of feeding tubes may prolong suffering without offering meaningful
Tom Harpur, in his 1990 article in the Toronto Star - "Human dignity must figure in decisions to prolong life" - presents numerous arguments in support of his thesis that the use of advanced medical technology to prolong life is often immoral and unethical, and does not take into consideration the wishes of the patient or their human dignity. However, it must be noted that the opening one-third of the article is devoted to a particular "human interest" story which the author uses to illustrate his broader argument, as well as to arouse pity among readers to support his view that human life should not always be prolonged by medical technology. This opening section suggests that a critical analysis of Harpur 's arguments may find widespread use of logical fallacies in support of the article 's thesis. In this essay I will argue that, given how greatly
A divergent set of issues and opinions involving medical care for the very seriously ill patient have dogged the bioethics community for decades. While sophisticated medical technology has allowed people to live longer, it has also caused protracted death, most often to the severe detriment of individuals and their families. Ira Byock, director of palliative medicine at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, believes too many Americans are “dying badly.” In discussing this issue, he stated, “Families cannot imagine there could be anything worse than their loved one dying, but in fact, there are things worse.” “It’s having someone you love…suffering, dying connected to machines” (CBS News, 2014). In the not distant past, the knowledge, skills, and technology were simply not available to cure, much less prolong the deaths of gravely ill people. In addition to the ethical and moral dilemmas this presents, the costs of intensive treatment often do not realize appreciable benefits. However, cost alone should not determine when care becomes “futile” as this veers medicine into an even more dangerous ethical quagmire. While preserving life with the best possible care is always good medicine, the suffering and protracted deaths caused from the continued use of futile measures benefits no one. For this reason, the determination of futility should be a joint decision between the physician, the patient, and his or her surrogate.
1 Identification The central main ethical issue in the life after death case is about whether or not Mrs. Jamison should have a child . Mrs. Jamison wants to have a child , but Mr. Jamison died , and no one knows if he would have wanted to have a child or if he would have wanted his wife to have to support a child alone . There are multiple issues at play in this case . One issue would be if Mrs. Jamison chooses to have a child the child will grow up with only one parent unlike the majority of children , it could cause the child to face some issues at school . There is also the issue of having to care for the child and balancing work . Another issue is that Mr. Jamison 's position on the issue is uncertain . There is no written document as
Aiding the death of infants is a much disputed controversy in healthcare. H. Tristram Engelhardt Jr. provides an ethical view that there is a moral duty not to treat an impaired infant when this will only prolong a painful life or would only lead to a painful death. It is these individuals, like Engelhardt, who must defend this position against groups who consider that we have the ability to prolong the lives of impaired infants, thus we are obligated to do so.
I have always thought of my character as being fairly ethical. I was raised with good moral values, and I always treated others with the respect and value that I would want to be treated with. I am a firm believer in karma, you get back what you put out! When reading the book Ethics: Approaching Moral Decisions by Arthur R. Holmes, it brought up some thoughts that have never occurred to me. Why do I make the decisions I make? What am I basing my decisions on? What impact do my beliefs have on the decisions I make? Holmes covers a wide range of answers to these questions. Our decisions are made with several different factors, including cultural relativism, ethical egoism, moral knowledge and virtue ethics just to name a few. The ethical
The case of Nancy Cruzan has become one of the landmark cases for withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration because of important ethical issues the case brings to light. At the time of the case, the United States Supreme Court had already established the right of an individual to refuse medical treatment. This issue therefore is not novel to the Cruzan case. Furthermore, there was not any controversy over who was the appropriate decision maker for Nancy Cruzan. The significant issue that the Cruzan case did bring to the table of medical ethics regarded whether or not a substituted decision make could choose to withdraw artificial hydration and nutrition on behalf of another individual.
According to Willard (n.d.), the ethical body can be examined by evaluating the personality, actions, and character of an individual. My own ethical characteristics includes being honest, fair, compassionate, courageous, patient, and generous. These characteristics developed through learned behavior and actions that led to my current ethical body.
“It is estimated that up to 45% of patients institutionalized with dementia have some degree of swallowing difficulty. Dysphagia affects up to 68% of elderly nursing home residents” (Sura, Madhavan, Carnaby & Crary, 2012.) My grandfather suffered from Alzheimer’s and spent the last few years of his life in a nursing home. Toward the end of his life, actually, two weeks before he passed away, he could no longer remember how to swallow and developed pneumonia. “Common complications of dysphagia in dementia patients include malnutrition and pneumonia” (Sura, Mahajan, Carnaby & Crary, 2012.) My grandmother was given several options such as inserting a feeding tube, which she knew my grandfather would not have wanted. She chose diet modification of thickened liquids. The nurses and staff who managed him faced difficult challenges when working with him. When a small amount of food was placed in his mouth, the nurse would take her hand and move his cheeks arou...
Recently, a family decided to end treatment for their 21 month old baby girl in the only “humane way” possible: nutrition withdrawal (Bever, 2014). In September, 19-month old Natalie Newton wandered into the family’s pool unsupervised by her parents. When she was found, Natalie was blue in the face from lack of oxygen and immediately rushed to the hospital. Though they were able to revive her, doctors informed the family that Natalie would not live; she was deaf, blind, unable to move and ultimately brain dead from being withdrawn from oxygen for as long as she had been. While Natalie remained immobile and dead to the world, her parents begged the physicians to euthanize their child. However, currently in the state of Texas, euthanziation is illegal and the hospital’s ethics committee would not allow it. The only method they allowed that they considered humane, was to withhold both nutrition and hydration from Natalie. While it’s always traumatic for any parent to watch their child die, the Newton’s looked on as it took nine full days for Natalie to finally pass away from lack of nutrition. The parents argue ...
The first definition of ethical in the dictionary is “pertaining to, or dealing with morals or the principles of morality; pertaining to right and wrong in conduct.” The first definition Dilemma is defined as “a situation requiring a choice between equally undesirable alternatives.” Using these two definitions, an ethical dilemma can be defined as when a person has to choose a decision that goes against one’s morals. One alternative may have a negative impact on one’s life or another person’s life. Another alternative may be an excellent choice for one person but may have negative impacts as well. Therefore, an ethical dilemma often puts ones morals and values into question. This paper will review a case study of euthanasia,
Health care ethics is at its most basic definition is a set of moral principles, beliefs and values that guide the Physician Assistant in making choices about medical care for their patients. The central belief of health care ethics is the sense of right and wrong and the principles about what rights we possess, along with the duties as Physician Assistants we owe our patients. (Opacic, D. A. 2003) One must consider carefully all aspects of health care decisions as it helps us make choices that are just.
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.
Some of the deficiencies in the way cultural relativism addresses moral problems, according to Holmes; are that they remain impractical, they are subject to change depending on where you live, and that people tolerate the different cultures. As a professional business person, I agree with Holmes analysis. Allowing others perceptions or beliefs to get away with our own personal beliefs would be contradicting ourselves. It is important to stand up for our beliefs, and help educate others on ethical issues. Over time we can make a difference in the world by modeling moral beliefs and ethics.
In BJ Millers TedTalk, “What Really Matters at the End of Life?” BJ Miller discusses on how we think on death and honor life. He speaks to the audience about how for the most people the scariest thing about death is not death itself, it is actually dying or suffering. The targeted audience is everyone in the world, because eventually everyone is going to die and everyone thinks about death. BJ 3 has big points in the article saying, Distinction between necessary and unnecessary suffering. Also by having a little ritual that helps with this shift in perspective. Another point is to lift and set our sights on well-being. We need to lift our sights, to set our sights on well-being, so that life and health and healthcare can become about making life more wonderful, rather than just less horrible.
In today’s society we all try to prolong life as long as possible. Technology is finding new ways that we can stay healthier and lead productive lives longer. Governor Lamm said “we should be careful in terms of our technological miracles that we don’t impose life on people who, in fact, are suffering beyond our ability to help”(Collins,1991,p.540). That is the real issue at hand; are we in fact over stepping our boundaries by keeping people alive who are maybe beyond our help. “Machines can extend the length but not always the quality of life” (Cloud,2000,p.62). As doctors, they need to think about the well being of the patient and if any methods could really help the situation.