The Terri Schiavo case was a huge start of the “Right to Die” movement, the underlying cause of Schiavo’s collapse was never given a diagnosis. Consequentialist moral theories focus on how much good can result from an action. Non Consequentialist moral theories or Deontological theories, consider not the consequences of an action but whether they fulfill a duty. Some theories that can be used include utilitarianism, Kant’s ethics and natural law theory. Being aware of the case already, I believe there should be some sort of law that gives doctors to comply with the wishes of the patient if they are in a lot of distress. Terri Schiavo collapses in her home in the early hours of the morning, when she arrived in the hospital doctors did not give …show more content…
As we know consequentialism is the focus of an action that does more intrinsically good than bad, one kind of consequentialist theory is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is an action that produces consequences that are more good over bad for everyone involved. In order to produce an action that is the best one a utilitarianist would consider both long and short term effects. Two sub categories of utilitarianism include act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. act utilitarianism bases an action on the overall well being produced by an individual. In Terri Schiavo’s case an act utilitarianist would consider how much pain she was in, if any, and would consider euthanizing her if it meant she will not be in anymore pain. However, they would also look into how much the action would affect her family. Overall, they would consider euthanasia as it would result in the least amount of suffering for everyone concerned and allowing the current situation to continue would cause enormous pain and anguish. For 15 years Terri Schiavo was in a state where she could not live up to her full potential, she was not really living. A rule utilitarianist would not consider euthanizing Schiavo even in the greatest of circumstances because, it would cause more harm than good. As a doctor it is their job to help and protect their patients, by denying Terri Schiavo the necessities
On 12/11/2015 SO EMT Perez was dispatched to CT-616 regaurding a fall. SO EMT Perez knocked and announced his presence at the door and was verbally invited in by the resident. The resident, a Mrs. Joan Buckalew was lying supine by the side of her bed. Mrs. Joan Buckalew stated that she had slid of the bed and onto the floor and was unable to get up on her own strength. Mrs. Joan Buckalew stated that she was currently seeing Dr.Putamunda at the medical center and also states that it has been a year since her last fall.
Schiavo’s husband, Michael Schiavo, strongly believed his wife wouldn’t
Theresa Marie Schiavo's case is very complicated to determine if the right decisions were taken, when it all came to keep hope on someone's life or just let that person die because of a brain damage due to lack of oxygen to her brain for several minutes. This tragic event occurred in a not very clear situation, where some still have doubts about what could cause this illness to Terri, where the husband, Michael Schavio was the only witness or the person responsible for Terri's illness. Even more complicated, it’s the years where Terri's life has been dependable on his spouse decisions to decide if death should be the best option for her, she was in a vegetative, able to breath and keep her blood pressure, but most important she needed a tube
Terri Schiavo was a 26 year old woman who collapsed at her home in February of 1990. Schiavo had no flow of oxygen to her brain for several minutes, causing her to fall into a persistent vegetative state. Although she was severely brain damaged, she still maintained a heartbeat with blood flow, and was able to see and move her limbs with impaired vision (Lynne, 2005).However, it was still necessary that Schiavo have a feeding tube to sustain her life. Terri 's husband believed that she would have wanted to be taken off life support and die a natural death, claiming he heard her say “If I ever have to be a burden to anybody, I don’t want to live like that.” (Lynne, 2005).
On November 1, 2014, just shy of her 30th birthday, a young woman named Brittany Maynard, utilized Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act to end her life. She had been diagnosed with an aggressive, terminal cancer just eleven months earlier. After having brain surgery in an attempt to stop the growth of the tumor, the tumor came back and doctors only gave her six months to live. With no cure her only option was radiation that could leave her scalp with first-degree burns and her hair singed off. Brittany and her family decided that radiation was not worth the physical and emotional pain it would cause.
Utilitarianism is one of the best-known theory under the consequentialism, and its idea is the Greatest Happiness Principle(GHP). According to the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Utilitarian believe that the purpose of morality is to
Imagine you are in a situation where you had to choose if someone you loved who was very ill and couldn’t decide for themselves, if they would have to die or stay alive and suffer. Would you be able to choose for them? How a person knowing that they had a disease that is going to kill them soon and went to the doctors and ask them to give them medicine to kill them so they did not have to suffer anymore. Should that doctor be accused for murder for helping that person wanting to end it instead of suffering anymore? In the cases of an euthanasia, a assisted suicide or the case between George and Lennie, killing can be a justifiable act under certain circumstances.
People are required to make ethical decisions every day. These decisions can greatly impact their future. What is important to some people may have little or no value to others. A person with a Christian worldview would base their ethical dilemma decision on their beliefs and the instructions that God’s word provides.
While her actions might not be seen as the best decision, she made one and did her best to make the rightful one under such poor circumstances that were out of her control. On the other hand, the Hospital should have prepared the health care faculty professionals for situations like such. One single doctor or a group are not at fault, because the hospital system failed them first. Multiple physicians and nurses made decisions on that day that saved and killed people.
Consequentialist believe that morality is about producing the right overall consequences, and that the action brings about either happiness, freedom or survival of species. Utilitarianism is an example of consequentialism that maximizes utility (happiness). The difference between utilitarianism and consequentialism is that a utilitarian overlooks justice, as long as an utilitarian can maximize pleasure they would do whatever it takes. Consequentialist enjoy maximizing pleasure like a utilitarian, but they also take into account autonomy and justice. A consequentialist believes that determining good by measuring the outcome, if the good for all in the act is greater than the bad for all in the act, it is deemed morally good.
In healthcare, Utilitarian’s believe in everyone having equal healthcare, or moral proper care regardless of their issues. A few examples of this are smokers who have bad lungs because they smoke receive the same care as non-smokers with bad lungs, or who also receive the same care as a person with a genetic heart disease, or a killer receiving the same care as a non-killer. Consequentialism and non-consequentialism involve making judgements about a person’s moral actions and the reasons behind
’s turn to die. I don’t believe that we should have the power to decide one’s fate. An important part to recognize that is not talked a lot about in this topic is that if euthanasia and assisted suicide is illegal, then doctors won’t have the pressure and burden of having to take someone’s life, even if the person wanted it. These people are educated to be doctors, not killers. They are meant to use everything in their power to save patients, not take away their life.
Utilitarianism is a teleological ethical theory based on the idea that an action is moral if it causes the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. The theory is concerned with predicted consequences or outcomes of a situation rather than focusing on what is done to get to the outcome. There are many forms of utilitarianism, having been introduced by Jeremy Bentham (act utilitarianism), and later being updated by scholars such as J.S. Mill (rule utilitarianism) and Peter Singer (preference utilitarianism). When referring to issues of business ethics, utilitarianism can allow companies to decide what to do in a given situation based on a simple calculation. Many people would agree that this idea of promoting goodness
Consequentialist theory followers. Consequentialist theory followers focus mostly on the consequences of the decision and the action. The most famous consequentialist theory is Utilitarianism. This theory follows the principle of utility which assumes that the decision is ethical if it maximizes benefits to the society and minimizes harms.