In Not Just a Death, a System Failure, author Barbara Morgan criticized the US health care system’s lack of palliative care, painful treatments, and unwillingness to face the end-of-life decision, which leads to many patients suffering the last part of their lives in discomfort. The author centers her argument on the anecdote about the dying of her late mother, who spent several months in the discomfort of intensive care until the time of her death. Moran’s point is one part valid since the treatments for serious diseases are dangerous, painful, and many times only focus on prolonging life rather than improving life. However, she neglected the fact that these treatments are optional, and patients are always open to spending the last part of their life away from the hospital.
Treatments for serious diseases are known to have many side effects that deteriorate patents’ health. For example, dialysis, the kidney treatment that the author’s mother was receiving, could seriously weaken a patient’s organ. Although this is a common treatment that serves to perform the function of a failing kidney, it could results in a variety of side effects
…show more content…
Studies have shown that adequate palliative care is not available to many seriously ill Americans. Recent research revealed that about a third of hospitals in the US completely lacked palliative care programs and many of these programs are flawed (CAPC). Even in hospitals with these programs, they often have limited accessability, and patients are generally unawared of them (Rhymes). Palliative care is fundamental in ensuring a patient’s comfort and recovery, yet, its importance has not been recognized until recent years. While palliative programs in the US are constantly being improved, many will still suffer in discomfort while receiving their medical
In Culture of Death, Wesley J. Smith is very clear about his opinions on where the future of healthcare is headed. In my essay, I will be discussing Smiths’ statements regarding assisted suicide, euthanasia and removal of food and fluid and why he believes the government should put an end to legalizing these practices. I will also discuss the important cases of Annette Corriveau, Robert Latimer, and others. Wesley Smith is a bioethicist and human rights activist that advocates for the illegalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia.
Marmar Tavasol Word Count: 815 The Right to End Suffering Mrs. Brown, a patient with ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) should have the option to end her life prematurely or to stay alive and suffer tremendously from a disease that is bound to kill her. Based on the readings and lecture in class, it has become apparent to me that choosing to die by withdrawing medication and choosing to die by taking medication follow very similar reasoning. On the paper Story of Teresa & Terrence - The Established Medical/Legal View, a parallel description of the reasoning that is followed for each case is shown, making clear the logical differences of each patient. In my opinion, the differences in the two cases of Teresa and Terrence are trivial at best.
Terminally ill patients lose control over so many aspects of their lives, in many ways physician-assisted death gives them back some of the control they lost. Illness is not discriminatory. Therefore, people of all ages and backgrounds are diagnosed with things like cancer, kidney failure, and heart disease every day. Also, for anyone who is unfortunate enough to be diagnosed with any terminal illness, it can feel like their disease controls every aspect of their lives and they have no choice in the matter. Authors for the Journal of the American Society on Aging Lee Combs and Grube describe how persistent pain took control of a young woman named Brittany Maynard’s life, “Even after undergoing a sophisticated surgery and numerous cancer treatments,
Though, in this paper, I have addressed several points that Dennis Plaisted has presented on why we should not legalize physician assisted suicide due to the issues with autonomy that convince the public that the state does not care enough to preserve the lives of those with less than six months to live. I argued that the limits of who and when an ill patient may be allowed to receive PAS are present for the state to relieve the pain of the ill who wish to have control over their death, and that it is only an alternative option for those patients. I considered a counterargument to my criticism, which argues that the state and doctors shouldn’t allow for PAS, as it gives the impression that the state does not care about the lives of the terminally ill. Just as well, the reputation of doctors as healers would be compromised if they supported this form of treatment. However, I explained that the quality of life is more valuable than forcing someone who is ill to suffer until their natural death.
This contentious theory contends that people should have the freedom to decide how and when to end their lives in situations where pain and suffering are unavoidable. Although there is much discussion about this concept and it creates ethical and moral issues, it emphasizes how crucial it is to provide people choices and support so they may control their end-of-life experiences. In the end, society must decide how to handle this delicate situation and make sure that everyone's rights and well-being are
It is believed that once practicing physician-assisted suicides becomes an acceptable concept in society, the next steps will easily be taken toward unethical actions such as involuntary euthanasia. Edmund D. Pellegrino, MD, Professor Emeritus of Medicine and Medical Ethics at Georgetown University claims that our healthcare system is too obsessed with costs and principles of utility. He defies the belief that the slippery slope effect is no more than a prediction, by reminding the outlooks and inclinations of our society. Furthermore, he believes there comes a day that incompetent patients and those in coma won’t be asked for their permission to use euthanasia. The Netherlands is another example of such misuse.
In the documentary, Bill Moyers talks to three terminally ill patients, their families, and their doctors about the concerns with physician-assisted suicide (PAS). PAS allows a terminally ill patient to hasten an inevitable and unavoidable death through a lethal dose. The patients considered PAS in order to end their prolonged suffering. The legal role of advance directives in end of life issues allows a patient to specify how he wishes to be treated by a healthcare provider during a progressively weakened state. Advance directives may provide patients with freedom to choose end of life treatment, but moral and religious implications, the ethical battle between a physician’s duty to care and inner-conscious, and state laws pose threats to PAS.
The possible legalization of euthanasia can cause a great disturbance in how people view life and death and the simplicity of how they would treat it. "There are many fairly severely handicapped people for whom a simple, affectionate life is possible." (Foot, p. 94) As demonstrated, the decision of terminating a person 's life is a very fragile and difficult one, emotionally and mentally. Nevertheless, it’s a choice we can make if it is passive euthanasia being expressed.
The Death with Dignity Act has two arguments: those who believe we have the right to choose how and when we die, and those who believe we do not possess that right; that we should not interfere with the natural order of life. Every year, people across America are diagnosed with a terminal illness. For some people there is time: time to hope for a cure, time to fight the disease, time to pray for a miracle. For others however, there is very little or no time. For these patients, their death is rapidly approaching and for the vast majority of them, it will be a slow and agonizing experience.
The documentary, A Death of One’s Own, explores the end of life complexities that many terminal disease patients have to undergo in deciding on dying and dignity. It features three patients, their families, and caregivers debating the issue of physician-assisted suicide or pain relief than may speed up death. One character, Jim Witcher has ALS and knows the kind of death he is facing and wants to control its timing. Kitty Rayl is suffering from terminal cancer and wants to take advantage of her state’s Death with Dignity Act and take medication to terminate her life. Ricky Tackett, on the other hand, has liver failure and together with his family and caregiver agrees on terminal sedation to relieve his delirium and pain.
It brought to my awareness both the limitation and the capacity of medicine. Although there was no medical intervention that could cure the diseases of those terminal patients, their quality of life was improved by an outstanding team of doctors, nurses and volunteers. This awareness helped reconcile myself to the fact that certain things, such as death and terminal illness, can not be avoided or changed. By viewing death as a natural part of life, I will be able to offer my dying patients the best care possible while also understanding my limitation as a physician and a human being.
The word “euthanize” means to bring about a person’s death to relieve them from serious distress. The topic of euthanasia in medicine has evolved since intensive care was first instituted. Before the 1950’s, a simple model was used to determine when someone was dead: the individual was dead when his or her heart stopped beating. In the modern light, the answer to this question isn’t as clear. With advancements in organ transplantation and other medical technologies, the stopping of a beating heart is no longer a definite death sentence.
Life or Death Who chooses death over life? Sometimes we have to make this decision over a loved one when there is no hope for their recovery. It would be incredibly hard to make this life or death decision on another human being and twice as hard when it is someone we love. The author discusses the argument of this controversial topic of sustaining life at any cost or dying peacefully as an ethical issue. An ethicist, a person who specializes in or writes on ethics, can provide valuable discernment with respect to right and wrong motives or actions.
The Right to Die has been taking effect in many states and is rapidly spreading around the world. Patients who have life threatening conditions usually choose to die quickly with the help of their physicians. Many people question this right because of its inhumane authority. Euthanasia or assisted suicide are done by physicians to end the lives of their patients only in Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana, New Mexico and soon California that have the Right to Die so that patients don’t have to live with depression, cancer and immobility would rather die quick in peace.
The act of euthanasia, whether active or passive, is heavily obstructed in the medical field. Through medical ethics, the act of passive euthanasia is condoned by withholding treatment and thus, allowing the patient to die. Without any direct contact with the patient, the doctor is not considered as the cause of death. Thus, the medical field views passive euthanasia as of lesser and more permissible value in comparison to active euthanasia. In the statement made by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association, they perceive this as contrary to mercy killing, as it is, the cessation of the employment of extraordinary means to prolong the life of the body when there is irrefutable evidence that biological death is imminent is the decision of the patient and/or his immediate family.