The right to live has always been implemented as a basic human right in the United States of America, even for those who have committed a crime and are placed under incarceration, but what about the right to die? The right to die has always been an uncomfortable and controversial topic but it becomes even more so when a minor is in question. If a minor is terminally ill and feels the need to refuse any medication or procedures that can potentially keep them alive, when should that be okay? Some of the articles focus on the maturity of a minor with an illness. If a minor has lived most of his or her life with an illness that has taken over their body enough to kill them without medical attention, it is assumed that they are informed on the dangers …show more content…
Allowing a minor the right to die has been called both ethical and unethical. Ethical because if they have suffered enough to choose death, they should be given the right to end their pain, but unethical because a child should not have the ability to choose life or death without having a full life experience. With a focus on medical ethics, some of the articles bring up the idea of “doing the right thing” whatever that may be. If keeping someone who is terminally ill alive is right then it should be done, but if ending their lives in order to preserve them from the physical excruciation, then that should be done. It is difficult to make a decision on who can refuse medical treatment bringing them to their death, but authors have given light to the ethics of each situation and moral decision given to each patient. Again, one is given the choice of what they believe would be a moral in the life of someone who is terminally ill. With the literature analysis of these articles I intend to provide different viewpoints on the controversial topic of giving minors the right to …show more content…
How does maturity come into play when talking about terminal illness? According to Berkley Law researcher Melinda T. Derish, "if a minor has experienced an illness for some time, understands it and the benefits and burdens of its treatment, has the ability to reason about it, has previously been involved in decision making about it, and has a comprehension of death that recognizes its personal significance and finality, then that person, irrespective of age, is competent to consent to forgoing life-sustaining treatment.” (Derish, 4). When a minor is comprehensive of the illness they carry and undergo treatments that come with a heavy burden, they should be considered mature enough to make choices in regard to their health even when they choose to go against the wishes of their legal
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.
This paper will focus on the two different sides of adolescents and their choice concerning end of life care. The first section will be adolescent centered and will help to provide a backbone to reinforce the choices they legally should be able to make using their right to autonomy. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Institute of Medicine did a very helpful study, that is pro adolescent choice that will be discussed in the first section of the paper. The second section will focus on Paternalism and the ethics behind the health care team making the ultimate decision that will benefit the patient. As well as information and studies in regard to an adolescent’s decision making process, and their tendency to be impulsive.
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
Currently, in the United States, 12% of states including Vermont, Oregon, and California have legalized the Right to Die. This ongoing debate whether or not to assist in death with patients who have terminal illness has been and is still far from over. Before continuing, the definition of Right to Die is, “an individual who has been certified by a physician as having an illness or physical condition which can be reasonably be expected to result in death in 24 months or less after the date of the certification” (Terminally Ill Law & Legal Definition 1). With this definition, the Right to die ought to be available to any person that is determined terminally ill by a professional, upon this; with the request of Right to Die, euthanasia must be
There are several important ethical issues related to euthanasia. One is allowing people who are terminally ill and suffering the right to choose death. Should these people continue to suffer even though they really are ba...
Engelhardt Jr., H. Tristram. “Ethical Issues in Aiding the Death of Young Children.” Intervention and Reflection Basic Issues in Medical Ethics. 8th ed. Australia: Thomson Wadsworth, 2008.
Imagine, if you will, that you have just found out you have a terminal medical condition. Doesn’t matter which one, it’s terminal. Over the 6 months you have to live you experience unmeasurable amounts of pain, and when your free of your pain the medication you’re under renders you in an impaired sense of consciousness. Towards the 4th month, you begin to believe all this suffering is pointless, you are to die anyways, why not with a little dignity. You begin to consider Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS). In this essay I will explain the ethical decisions and dilemmas one may face when deciding to accept the idea of Physician-Assisted Suicide. I will also provide factual information pertaining to the subject of PAS and testimony from some that advocate for legalization of PAS. PAS is not to be taken lightly. It is the decision to end one’s life with the aid of a medical physician. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary states that PAS is “Suicide by a patient facilitated by means (as a drug prescription) or by information (as an indication of a lethal dosage) provided by a physician aware of the patient’s intent.” PAS is considered, by our textbook – Doing Ethics by Lewis Vaughn, an active voluntary form of euthanasia. There are other forms of euthanasia such as non-voluntary, involuntary, and passive. This essay is focusing on PAS, an active voluntary form of euthanasia. PAS is commonly known as “Dying/Death with Dignity.” The most recent publicized case of PAS is the case of Brittany Maynard. She was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer in California, where she lived. At the time California didn’t have Legislative right to allow Brittany the right to commit PAS so she was transported to Oregon where PAS is legal....
There is great debate in this country and worldwide over whether or not terminally ill patients who are experiencing great suffering should have the right to choose death. A deep divide amongst the American public exists on the issue. It is extremely important to reach an ethical decision on whether or not terminally ill patients have this right to choose death, since many may be needlessly suffering, if an ethical solution exists.
Having six months or less to live or having an illness in which patients finds themselves faced with a decision on how they are going to spend those remaining days are issues that arise in the healthcare setting. For some it is making lasting memories with their loved ones, while for others it is trying to hasten their own death. Dilemmas have been encountered by hospice workers concerning the ethical and unethical issues of patients they are caring for when choosing alternatives rather than palliative. Palliative care is specialized medical care for people with serious illnesses. It is focused on providing patients with relief from the symptoms of pain and stress of their illness while providing comfort measures. The goal is to improve quality of life for both the patient and their family Making the Case (2014) Retrieved from http:www.capc.org. Palliative care is provided in a hospice setting or in one’s own home during his or her dying days. In a study of end-of-life care done in the United States it was found that patients in hospitals often do not have their needs for pain management or treatments provided to their full potential (Connor, 2007-2008, P.93). When a patient is suffering or they just don’t want to deal with waiting to die, they choose to take matters into their own hands by either Voluntarily Stop Eating and Drinking (VSED) or Patient Assisted Suicide (PAS). This paper will explain the ethical and unethical dilemmas that are presented in a hospice environment when dealing with VSED and PAS.
The right to assisted suicide is a significant topic that concerns people all over the United States. The debates go back and forth about whether a dying patient has the right to die with the assistance of a physician. Some are against it because of religious and moral reasons. Others are for it because of their compassion and respect for the dying. Physicians are also divided on the issue. They differ where they place the line that separates relief from dying--and killing. For many the main concern with assisted suicide lies with the competence of the terminally ill. Many terminally ill patients who are in the final stages of their lives have requested doctors to aid them in exercising active euthanasia. It is sad to realize that these people are in great agony and that to them the only hope of bringing that agony to a halt is through assisted suicide.When people see the word euthanasia, they see the meaning of the word in two different lights. Euthanasia for some carries a negative connotation; it is the same as murder. For others, however, euthanasia is the act of putting someone to death painlessly, or allowing a person suffering from an incurable and painful disease or condition to die by withholding extreme medical measures. But after studying both sides of the issue, a compassionate individual must conclude that competent terminal patients should be given the right to assisted suicide in order to end their suffering, reduce the damaging financial effects of hospital care on their families, and preserve the individual right of people to determine their own fate.
Do terminally ill patients have the right to choose death with the assistance of others? Do religious and political leaders have the right to intervene with a patientís decision to die with the assistance of others? These two questions are some of the many about which this increasingly complex debate thrives. Society is often asked to answer each ques...
If an individual wants to end their life, due to age, illness, or any other reason, they should be allowed to decide for themselves what they want. As a culture, we generally look down on suicide, and even disapprove the thought of someone wanting to die. It is often delineated as being selfish, and often leads to preventative course of action to prevent suicide. However, if someone believes that he or she has a moral right to die, and someone else agrees or disagrees, then begins an ethical dilemma. In my personal opinion, if someone wants to die, he or she should be allowed to commit suicide, or be assisted in death. There are implementations, such as not allowing anyone not of a set legal age to commit suicide or seek out an assisted death. If someone has a utilitarian approach to his or her death, believing that they have no further purpose in life, who
As precious as life is to come in to this world, there is debate about whether life going out of this world should hold the same amount of pricelessness, happiness, and peace in cases of the terminally ill with no chance of long-term survival. This deliberation of whether physician assisted suicide should be permitted is a major medical ethical concern, however, as a future nurse, this argument does not have a place in modern medicine. In the following sections, the ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence are discussed with regard to the patient’s best interest and the personal views and opinions of a prospective nurse.
There are many ethical dilemmas in the medical field, especially when it is related to patient’s autonomy; an example to this is euthanasia. Many patients prefer to go over this procedure before continuing suffering from a terminal illness. However, many people to this day believe that this is an unethical practice to perform.
Crimes in the Movies REACTION PAPER SILENCE OF THE LAMBS Remembering this movie as a child, I do remember being very scared. But, I have many different reasons while watching this movie and being scared as an adult. As hysterical as that may sound, as a child, I believe the thought process of seeing a man eat another man’s face was very odd but not likely to ever happen. Now, as an adult, and 30 years old, I do realize the crazy “situations” much like those in Silence of the Lambs can actually happen. So my fear is of a much different understanding as an adult.