BryantWk3A19380538-notes-export
.pdf
School
Livingston High School**We aren't endorsed by this school
Course
ENG 225
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Dec 16, 2024
Pages
9
Uploaded by MSBRYANT67
Running header: DEONTOLOGY1Applying an Ethical theoryDonna BryantPHI208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning (ACQ1608D)Instructor: Instructor: Jean SuplizioMarch 7, 2016- 1 - [no notes on this page]
Running header: DEONTOLOGY2Applying an Ethical theoryIs physician assisted suicide right or wrong when dealing with terminally ill patients? Physician assisted suicide has been one of the most debatable topic in the last decade. These debates stem from whether it is morally ethical for a physician to assist a patient with suicide. “Assisted suicide is terms used to describe the process in which a doctor or a close relative of an either sick or disabled individual engages in an activity which directly or indirectly leads to the death of the individual” (Levy, Azar, Huberfeld, Siegel & Strous, 2013 p.403).The issue of physician assisted suicide goes back to whether or not doctors should help patients die; it has been communicated orally before the birth of Christ. According to Thompson 2004, The Hippocratic Oath was penned before the fourth century B.C. and states that “I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel”. Most terminally ill patients that are in their last phase of an incurable disease seek the assisted of their physician instead of involving a family member to spare them any feelings of guilt. “In many cases of physician assisted suicide close relative of the patient would not be able to participate because it is too emotionally demanding”(Georges, Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Muller, van der Wal, van der Heide & van der Maas, 2007 p.3).When it comes to moral ethics on this topic there are many views, Philosopher Immanuel Kant deontology theory argues that an action is either right or wrong in itself regardless of the consequences and it is our responsibility, our good will to do what is right. In this paper, I will show how a deontologist would argue that a physician assisting a terminally ill patient with suicide is ethically wrong.First, we will examine the deontology theory and see exactly what it involves.The word deontology was originated from the Greek, meaning duty. Immanuel Kant is the philosopher who formulated this form of moral theory in 1788. The deontologist theory is centered around on - 2 - 1234567891. Review the Outline Modeland be sure to follow that nexttime! It spells out exactlywhat you should do. Becauseyou submission does notinclude the appropriate sub-headings, I know that you didnot review all the assignmentinstructions. It will, however,always pay off![JeanSuplizio]2. p.403).Not quite APA. You canreview APA formattingguidelines at:http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/There should be a commaafter the year and a spacebetween the p. and thenumber.[Jean Suplizio]3. it has beencommunicated orally beforethe birth of Christ.????What you seem to mean isthat a prohibition against PASwas articulated in ancienttimes. Christ really hasnothing to do with it.[JeanSuplizio]4. counsel”. MostThere is a citation missinghere to the year and pagenumber.The year should not appearafter the author's name.In addition, when youintroduce an author, refer tothem by their full name first;use their last name only afterthat.[Jean Suplizio]5. moral ethicsThis is redundant.[JeanSuplizio]6. there are many views,Philosopher Immanuel Kantdeontology theory arguesthat an action is either rightor wrong inRun-on sentence. It needsrevising.[Jean Suplizio]7. show how a deontologist would argue that a physician assisting aterminallyill patient with suicide is ethically wrong.Per the Model you were provided: "The last sentence of the introductionshould briefly summarize the conclusion or position on this issue that youthink is best supported by this theory [the ethical theory you decided toapply], and succinctly state what the objection will be."I don't see that you include a reference to the objection.[Jean Suplizio]8. First, we will examine the deontology theory and see exactly what itinvolves.You just said this. No need to repeat yourself.[Jean Suplizio]9. The worddeontology was originated from the Greek, meaning duty.
- 2 (cont) -The word's etymology really doesn't help you do the ethics.Get straight to the task at hand.[Jean Suplizio]
Running header: DEONTOLOGY3whether or not a situation is good or bad, more on whether the reason why the situation was brought about was right or wrong. “Deontological ethics focuses on the will of the person acting, the person's intention in carrying out the act, and particularly, the rule according to which the act is carried out” (Mosser, 2013 Section 6.1).Kant believes human emotionsimpulse and consequences should not have any role in moral action; as a result, the driving force behind any action must be based on responsibility and well thought out before anything can takes place. According to Kant 2008, in “The Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals” for an action to have moral worth, for it to reflect a good will, the action must be undertaken for duty’s sake and not for some other reasons, such as fear of being caught or punished. Kant based this moral principle on what would define the actions of right or wrong regardless of the circumstances. This principle is known as categorical imperative. In 1977, Kant introduce the principles categorical imperative, it is define as a suggestion that acknowledges a certain action to be necessary. Even though categorical imperative is something one must do, Kant believed that morality should be a requirement, not something that an individual can aim for; he presents three formulations. (1) “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction” (Kant, 2008 p. 26) This is quite similar to the “Golden Rule” it basically means treat people the way in which you want to be treated. (2) “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end but always at the same time as an end”(Kant, 2008 p.29).This was derived from the first one meaning a person cannot treat another person as a mean to an end.(3)“Act as though the maxim of your action were to become, through your will, a universal law of nature” (Kant, 2008 p.24). This applies to using reasonable judgmentsuch as lying or killing. Kant considered this principle as an absolute agreement, regardless of one - 3 - 1234561. or not a situation is goodor bad, more on whetherthe reason why thesituation wasbrought about was rightThis is unclear. It's unhelpfulto say the deontologist isn'tconcerned with good or bad.That's what ethics is.[JeanSuplizio]2. (Mosser, 2013 Section6.1).Your source should be toKant whom we read andwhose theory it is, notMosser, a secondary sourcewho re-presents him.Remember, give your firstattention to primaryreferences. Note that Kant ison the list of PrimaryReferences too. Had youcited Kant, the preferredreference here, you couldhave killed two birds with onestone, so to speak.[JeanSuplizio]3. “The Foundations of theMetaphysics of Morals”Should be in italics.[JeanSuplizio]4. 1977,No. Kant lived in the 18thcentury.[Jean Suplizio]5. imperative, it is define asa suggestion thatacknowledges a certainaction to benecessary. Even thoughcategorical imperativeAnother run-on sentence.The Categorical Imperative(CI) is anything but asuggestion. Note the word:Imperative. The CI is acommand of reason.[JeanSuplizio]6. “Golden Rule”Not in all ways.It's probably more important to note the way the two rules are different.It’s much more than that. Suppose the person who wants “done unto themas they do to others” is a psychopath. That’s a problem for the Golden Rule.It’s not a problem for Kant. Why?[Jean Suplizio]
Running header: DEONTOLOGY4wants, needs or results that could occur from these actions and if something is not done with the purpose of duty, then there are no moral value and, therefore, meaningless.When applying the deontology theory one must look at all sides, whether a situation is good or bad depends on whether the action that brought it about was right or wrong. Physician assisted suicide does not get a waiver because it deals with terminally ill patients who feels it is their only alternative. “Proponents of PAS argue for patient’s rights to choose circumstances under which they die, especially in cases involving terminal illness and unbearable suffering” (Friend, 2011 p.115). The deontology perspective on physician assisted suicide is totally different. Kant’s states that one should “act in such a way as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of anyone else, always as an end and never merely as a means” (Kant, 2008 p.29). Why put the burden of taking one’s life at the hands of another human being, this does not represent humanity, it would only be a mean to an end. “To use someone as a mere means is to involve them in a scheme of action to which they could not in principle consent” (Oneil, 1993p 412). In cases that involves physician assisted suicide the patient and the physician believes that the other one has maxims of his or her own and is not just an object or to be used at will. According to Kant “the more difficult the duty, the greater the moral value” this is simply a way of saying one should choose to die naturally which is more important than dying with the assists of a physician. There are other options that can help a patient die with dignity without the assists of a physician. “Many argue that a compromise is to continue to develop drugs and other forms of palliative care treatment that reduces suffering to alleviate a terminally ill person's anguish. The hospice movement emphasizes the reduction of end-of-life suffering and promotes death with dignity, and it has thus become an increasingly attractive option for those who resist endorsing PAS” (Mosser, 2013 Section 6.3). Lastly, doctors must recognize that there is no - 4 - 123451. not get a waiver becauseit deals with terminally illpatients who feels it is theironly alternative.“ProponentsOkay good.[Jean Suplizio]2. p.115). The deontologyperspective on physicianassisted suicide is totallydifferent. Kant’s states thatone should “act in such away as to treat humanity,whether in your own personor in that of anyoneYou really need to focus onexplicating this differencemore clearly.[Jean Suplizio]3. burden of taking one’slife at the hands of anotherhuman being, this does notrepresent humanity, itwould only be a meanFirst, this is a question (so itshould end in a questionmark. Second, it's rhetorical.Watch those questions -rhetorical and otherwise. Asa rule, in philosophy if youraise a question, you areunder obligation to answer it.It's best to write in theclearest and most directmanner that you canproceeding methodically.Besides, you will probably willnot appreciate when yourreader answers the questionyou raise in a form other thanthe way you anticipate.Thirdly, the implication of thisis "do it yourself!" That's notan implication Kant wouldaccept.[Jean Suplizio]4. “To use someone as ameremeans is to involve them ina scheme of action to whichthey could not in principleconsent”At this point, you are justdoing too much quoting.[Jean Suplizio]5. (image annotation)No. This is not Kant's argument.Kant regarded suicide as dehumanizing and one of our perfect duties toavoid. For Kant the idea of suicide is contradictory. It arises in self-love butself-love is the root of all actions designed to enhance life, not destroy it.[Jean Suplizio]
Running header: DEONTOLOGY5disgraces in letting nature take its course with the human body, even when patients are terminally ill they can still be medically cared for until the very end.There are many people that are oppose to Kant’s belief on physician assisted suicide, they believe when a patients starts to think about ending their own life they have already accepted that their fate is inevitable. “A person who is virtually certain to die within a given amount of time and is experiencing or will experience a lot of pain before he or she dies should be able to choose an earlier, less painful death”(Mosser, 2013 Section 6.3). When an autonomous patient wants to end their suffering their wishes should surpass the wishes of others who want to avoid consequences. This is an argument that is based on the belief that it is the physician’s moral duty to help relieved the pain and suffering of terminally ill patient regardless of the backlash. “Supporters of physician-assisted suicide justify their position by placing the value of individual autonomy above all other values and ethical considerations. Giving individual autonomy absolute priority runs roughshod over competing values, protections, and needs and ignores the harmful effects on other people, societal institutions (the medical profession in particular), and the general community”(N.A I., 2013 p1450-1452). If a terminally patient can communicate autonomy can be exercised. Unbearable pain does not have to be tolerated. “If the terminally ill patient wants pain relief, the physician has an ethical and an almost certain legal obligation to provide it. Pain relief may hasten the death of a terminally ill patient. Provided the intent is to relieve pain, the hastening of death is neither ethically nor morally wrong” (Milton, 95, p123). Given these points, once a terminally ill patient and a physician establish a relationship, it is his moral duty to treat them.In this essay I asked the question, is physician assisted suicide right or wrong when dealing with terminally ill patients? I have applied the deontology theory to this very debatable - 5 - 121. physician assistedsuicide, theyAnother run-on sentence.[Jean Suplizio]2. “If the terminally illpatient wants pain relief,the physician has an ethicaland an almost certain legalobligation toprovide it. Pain relief mayhasten the death of aterminally ill patient.Provided the intent is torelieve pain, the hasteningof death is neither ethicallynor morally wrong” (Milton,95, p123).Too many quotes.[JeanSuplizio]
Running header: DEONTOLOGY6topic. According to Philosopher Immanuel Kant 2008, for an action to have moral worth, for it to reflect a good will, the action must be undertaken for duty’s sake and not for some other reason, such as fear of being caught or punished. Provided that this is true, than physician assisted suicide is ethically wrong. In contrast, there are those that have objections to Kant’s theory, they feel that individual autonomy should be considered before moral values.ReferenceFriend, M.L. (2011).Physician-Assisted Suicide: Death with Dignity?Journal of Nursing Law (J - 6 - 11. individual autonomyBut Kant believes thatautonomy gives expression tothe Moral Law.[JeanSuplizio]
Running header: DEONTOLOGY7NURS LAW), p.110-116. Retrieved from Ashford Online Library @http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/eds/detail/detail?Georges, J; Onwuteaka-Philipsen BD; Muller M.T; van der Wal, G; van der Heide, A; van der Maas P.J. (2007).Relatives' perspective on the terminally ill patients who died after euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide: a retrospective cross-sectional interview study in the Netherlands.Death Studies (DEATH STUD), 31(1): 1-15. (15p) Retrieved from Ashford Online Library@eds.a.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer? Kant, I. (2008). Groundwork for the metaphysic of morals. In J. Bennett (Ed. & Trans.), Early Modern Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdfs/kant1785.pdf (Original work published in 1785)Milton, N. (1995). Lessons from Rodriguez v. British Columbia.Issues in Law & Medicine. Fall95, Vol. 11 Issue 2. Retrieved from. Ashford Online Library@ http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/eds/detail/detail?Mosser, K. (2013). Understanding philosophy [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/N.A I. (2013).Physician-assisted suicide.The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol 368(15), pp. 1450-1452.Retrieved from:http://search.proquest.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/docview/1326293595?accountid=32521- 7 - 11. Not APA. You can reviewAPA formatting guidelines at:http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/[JeanSuplizio]
Running header: DEONTOLOGY8O’Neill, O. (1993). A simplified account of Kant’s Ethics. In T. Regan (Ed.), Matters of Life and Death, 411-415. Retrieved from http://users.manchester.edu/Facstaff/SSNaragon/Online/texts/201/O'Neill,%20Kant.pdfThompson, R. (2004). I Swear by Apollo, the Hippocratic Oath is Obsolete.Physician Executive. Vol. 30 Issue 2, p60-63. 4p. Retrieved from: Ashford Online Library @ http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?- 8 - [no notes on this page]