Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There was a woman named Terri Schiavo who was declared in a permanent vegetative condition by doctors for 15 years because of severe brain damage she received. Her husband, who was her legal guardian, claimed she voiced her opinion that she never desired to be kept alive on life support if anything ever happened to her. In order to keep Terri alive she was required to be nourished by force feeding her through a feeding tube, which her parents were doing to keep her alive in a vegetable condition. Her parents desired to prolong her life and keep them from having to suffer losing her by continuing to do this so the husband was not hampered with taking care of her. Terri’s parents tried to use religion as a way of keeping their daughter alive …show more content…
Shortly afterwards, with her quality of life severely diminished and her future goals and desires swept away, Joni went into severe depression and had serious thoughts of ending her own life. This scenario is difficult to make an ethical decision based solely on the facts provided. As readers we do not know her religious believes or what kind of help and counseling she has received after going through such a traumatic life altering event. The obvious decision is that it is Joni’s life to do as she pleases and if she desires to end it then she should be allowed to do so. As we see in 1 Samuel 31:4-5 that when faced with the option of being tortured and living in excruciating pain, eventually dying a slow and agonizing death, Saul and his armor bearer both end their lives. If Joni does this she is making her own ethical decision. When life becomes so burdensome, death becomes a sought-after refuge. Schopenhauer affirmed: "They tell us that suicide is the greatest act of cowardice... that suicide is wrong; when it is quite obvious that there is nothing in the world to which every man has a more unassailable title than to his own life and person." The other option is that Joni tough it out and hope that she can find a purpose and meaning to this new life she is forced to live. When looking at her ethical decisions for this she will need to …show more content…
She may continue to be unhappy and fall in to a deeper depression as well as making those around her miserable because of her attitude and possibility of lashing out at them. Her family could become divided over how to best take care of her and possibly lead to divorce or estranged relationships between family members. If she out lives her family she would become a ward of the state and thus a burden on the taxpayers who would have to fund her medical care, hospital services as well as the cost of a care center. Joni could also face the possibility of abuse by her care givers, whether it is her family or care center staff. Some of the alleged benefits Joni could have by following the Christian worldview would be the prospect that she would praise God for allowing her to live and become a role model and inspiration to others who are going through the same kind of circumstances. She could prosecute the state for not having warning signs about the shallow waters or no diving signs posted. The lawsuit could facilitate her to live comfortably in her condition and have private attendants to take care of her. By living, Joni may one day find someone who will love her for the way she is and marry her and they could have a happy life together. It is
There are many ethical paradigms through which humans find guidance and justification for their own actions. In the case of contractarianism, citizens of a state are entitled to human rights, considered to be unalienable, and legal rights, which are both protected by the state. As Spinello says, “The problem with most rights-based theories is that they do not provide adequate criteria for resolving practical disputes when rights are in conflict” (14). One case that supports Spinello is the case of Marlise Munoz, a brain-dead, pregnant thirty-three year old, who was wrongly kept on life support for nearly two months at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas. Misinterpretation of the Texas Advance Directives Act by John Peter Smith Hospital led to the violation of the contractarian paradigm.
In February of 1990 a woman named Terri Schiavo collapsed at home suffering cardiac arrest in her home in St. Petersburg, Florida. She was resuscitated but had severe brain damage because she had no oxygen going to her brain for several minutes. Terri was severely brain damaged and in a vegetative state but could still breathe and maintain a heart beat on her own. After two and a half months and no signs of improvement, impaired vision, and the inability to move her arms and legs she needed a feeding tube to sustain her life since she seemed to be in a persistent vegetative state. For 2 years doctors attempted speech and physical therapy with no success. In 1998 Schiavos husband claimed she would not want to live in that quality of life without a prospect of recovery so he tried several times over the course of many years to pull the feeding tube so she could pass. Bob and Mary Schindler challenged and fought for a
To continue on the subject of suicide, I will bring in some information from my last source, “Shakespeare’s Hamlet 1.2.35-38,” by Kathryn Walls. (Gather information from source and relate to the book).
Terri Schiavo is a forty year old women who had a severe heart attack 15 years ago which resulted in brain damage. She had no living will so there is no legal document of what she would have wanted if she became brain damage and couldn’t function on her own but her husband, Michael Schiavo, says that after 15 years of being on a feeding tube she would have wanted to die. The question is should he have the right to remove the feeding tube? Anybody who knows me will know that my answer is no! The reason for that is because I am a Christian and I do not believe in terminating someone’s life. It’s my belief that as long as a persons heart is beating he or she stills has life in them.
In my opinion, if a person is terminally ill and there is no chance of bringing them back then they should have the right to make the choice whether they want to be kept alive or let go. What is the point of sitting in a hospital for the rest of a person’s life if they are not going to be able to do any thing? This claim is supported throughout the entire text through her believes in religion. And every night I prayed that his agonized eyes would never again plead with me to let him die (96). Barbara talked about how she wondered about a spiritual judge, and by this, it shows that religion is an important part in her life. Several times in the text, he begs to be let go so his suffering could be come to an end. Some would ask why we would not have the right to die. How enjoyable could life be when a person must be resuscitated fifty-two times in just one month?
In an effort to provide the standard of care for such a patient the treating physicians placed Ms. Quinlan on mechanical ventilation preserving her basic life function. Ms. Quinlan’s condition persisted in a vegetative state for an extended period of time creating the ethical dilemma of quality of life, the right to choose, the right to privacy, and the end of life decision. The Quilan family believed they had their daughter’s best interests and her own personal wishes with regard to end of life treatment. The case became complicated with regard to Karen’s long-term care from the perspective of the attending physicians, the medical community, the legal community local/state/federal case law and the catholic hospital tenants. The attending physicians believed their obligation was to preserve life but feared legal action both criminal and malpractice if they instituted end of life procedures. There was prior case law to provide guidance for legal resolution of this case. The catholic hospital in New Jersey, St. Clare’s, and Vatican stated this was going down a slippery slope to legalization of euthanasia. The case continued for 11 years and 2 months with gaining national attention. The resolution was obtained following Karen’s father being granted guardianship and ultimately made decisions on Karen’s behalf regarding future medical
On March 31,2005, Terri Schiavo passed away. She had a heart attack in 1990 that left her in an almost vegetative state. She had little to no brain activity and was kept alive by a feeding tube for over 14 years. Her husband eventually started a campaign for her to die in 1997. He was fighting for her right to die. Her feeding tube was finally removed on March 18, 2005 and she literally starved to death. Although Schiaivo did not have a terminal illness or unbearable pain, she still suffered in a vegetative state for over 14 years.(time.com)
In discussions of euthanasia, a controversial issue has been whether euthanasia is morally wrong or not. Many people, the U.S. Government included, believe that euthanasia is not permissible when it is considered active. According to Warren’s view, however, euthanasia may not be morally wrong in some cases. Therefore, they disagree on whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. In this paper, I will use Warren’s view on moral personhood to see what her verdict of euthanasia and assisted suicide might be. After that, I will use real life cases to see what Warren’s verdict is in a real life situation of euthanasia. Finally, I will raise two possible objections to her view.
The debate over euthanasia is a prevalent and pressing issue in today’s society, and possibly one of the most popular. Euthanasia is a topic that will separate a room of people by beliefs. About three years ago, 22 percent of the 18 members of the Humane Society board resigned over the controversial issue of euthanasia (Humane Society CEO Search Reignites Euthanasia Debate 2014). This is a debated issue in which many believe that a person should have the right to decide on how they feel (EUTHANASIA Will Be Debated at an Event in Cheltenham This Week 2014). Euthanasia is a heavily debated topic that is deeply divided because of personal conviction or religion. This is an ongoing moral and ethical worldwide debate, is the w...
There are two options in this pronouncement, let Joni end her life or let her live. If the decision to end her life is made then her family will be sad and miss her. In euthanasia of human beings, a doctor would be giving Joni drugs that will stop her heart ultimately killing her. The doctor that would perform this euthanasia may then survive with guilt for the rest of his or her life. With the advancement of medicine, there could be a breakthrough in quadriplegic medicine and Joni might one day be able to walk again. If this was discovered after Joni’s death, the doctor performing the euthanasia and Joni’s family will likely have a sense of guilt and regret their
Death was very near to a girl named Patti, who suffered through anorexia for more than two years. She ate nothing but two cream-filled cookies a day for more than seven weeks. The first cookie was breakfast and lunch, and the second was for her main meal. When she decided that these two cookies had too much fat in them, she proceeded to scrape off the cream filling from both of the cookies to decrease her fat intake. But still that was too much fat, so she cut down to one cookie without the filling. She now gets fed intravenously in her arm to get nourishment in the hospital. She is being fed against her will to save her life. But of course not all cases of this disorder are quite as severe or dramatic as this, yet all cases should be helped, because they can take a...
I believe that parents are not morally justified in having a child merely to provide life saving medical treatment to another child or family member, but that this does not mean that the creation of savior siblings is morally impermissible. By having a child solely to provide life saving medical treatment, you are treating this child merely as a means rather than an end to the individual child. By having the child solely as a means to save another, you are violating this savior sibling in that you are treating them as a source of spare parts that can be used by the sickly child in order to solely promote the prolonged life of the currently sick child. This view that having a child merely as a way to provide medical treatment does not consider the multitude of other avenues that this newborn child can take, and presupposes that the child will only be used for the single purpose of providing life saving medical treatment through use of stems cells or organ donation. What this view fails to consider is that these savior siblings are valued by families for so much more than just as a human bag of good cells and organs that can be used to save the life of the original child. Instead, these savior siblings can be valued as normal children themselves, in that they can be valued in the same way that any other child who is born is valued, yet at the same time they will also be able to provide life-saving treatment to their sibling. My view runs parallel to the view held by Claudia Mills who argues that it is acceptable to have a savior sibling, yet at the same time we can not have a child for purely instrumental motives, and instead should more so value the child for the intrinsic worth that they have. Mills presents her argument by puttin...
Tracy’s father was faced with an unfortunate decision, and in his decision, I cannot condemn him for his actions. Now saying this I don’t believe what he did was particularly the right decision or particularly the wrong decision. As for his life sentence, it’s quite outrageous. My reasoning for this is because of his actual intentions and his mental rationale in doing so. He claims that he did it out of love and mercy, which I whole-heartedly agree with. With Tracy’s condition already being a significant trouble to live with and the fact that her surgeries brought her much pain and suffering is something that would be hard to bear. They claimed that she had the mental capacity of a four month old baby, so in that sense, it’s almost like watching an innocent baby constantly in pain. One part of the case says that Tracy’s mother believed that the many surgeries especially the one that removed her upper thigh bone were not surgeries but mutilations. I can see why her mother would think this. I can only imagine what it would be like to watch your loved one constantly be mutilated and going under the knife. Surgery and visits to the doctor alone can be stressful enough in itself, let alone ones that can be perceived as mutilations. Additionally the case states that Tracy had 5-6 seizures a day, which would imaginably be hard to watch and care for. Ultimately, I cannot in any way condemn Tracy’s
Imagine visiting your 85-year-old mother in the hospital after she has a debilitating stroke. You find out that, in order to survive, she requires a feeding tube and antibiotics to fight an infection. She once told you that no matter what happened, she wants to live. But the doctor refuses further life-sustaining treatment. When you ask why, you are told, in effect, "The time has come for your mother to die. All we will provide is comfort care."
A person has the perpendicular to die, the right to choose when to die. Her conclusion should be well-conjecture out and the perform should be well consummate. Those who believe that vigor is a gift that only God can take away have the upright to amble and wait. Suicide should be contract carefully and thoughtfully (after all, a lucky attempt is irreversible), but within these parameters, it should be revolve virtuously acceptable.