Ethical dilemma_ Human Euthanasia.edited
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Rongo University College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
INVESTMENT
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
8
Uploaded by SuperFoxPerson919
Grace Chung Professor Landau
WRIT 340
10 Nov, 2023
Ethical Dilemmas in Human Euthanasia: Who is Allowed to Choose Death?
We didn’t choose to be born, but can we choose to die? Human euthanasia, the act of intentionally ending a person's life to relieve enduring pain and suffering, is a complex moral problem. (Davey and Lu 1) The moral situation of human euthanasia comes from the pressure regarding an individual's independence and the value of protecting life. On one side, people who are suffering from terminal illnesses and their families argue for the right to choose when and
how to die. On the other hand, religious group such as Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity argues for the holiness of life. Also, Disability Rights Advocates and Bioethics Scholars argue the possibility that this can be misused. Who is allowed to choose death? And when are they allowed
to die? And How? It requires careful consideration of the "both/and" viewpoint with the question
of whether it is morally justifiable to allow an individual to choose to end their own life.
The patients who are suffering from terminal illnesses and their families argue that
humans have the right to end their lives. Those who have to suffer physical and mental pain until they die from incurable pain should be guaranteed the right to choose euthanasia as a solution. In addition, the economic and mental burden on the patient's families who have been caring for a long time suffers from depression and trauma. Family and friends of patients who chose
euthanasia had less traumatic grief, symptoms, current feelings of grief, and post-traumatic stress
reaction than those who died of natural causes. (Swarte et al.) Not only that but patients also
1
have to think about the guilt of causing unwanted pain to their families which will lead the
patient to suffer mentally.
On the other hand, some religious groups think euthanasia is a form of murder. Since all
human life is sacred because God gives it, euthanasia is an act that refuses God’s gift and
undermines human dignity. Also, as mentioned by proponents, there may be patients who choose
euthanasia because of the pressure, not because they want it. One survey reported that 29% of
patients with terminal illnesses reported financial hardship. And 9% of patients received
intensive End-of-life care (Tucker-Seeley et al.) The patient diagnosed with a terminal illness experiences not only physical pain but also financial difficulties. This outcome could create pressure on the patient to consider sacrificing their life for the sake of their family.
In addition, there is the possibility of abuse. If you can die painlessly in an instant with a drug that can be made simple, you can use it for murder disguised as suicide. For example,
Thomas Middleton, who was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig’s disease, moved into a new place in July 2008 and died by euthanasia later that month. Two days after Middleton died, and his estate
trustee listed the property for sale and deposited $90,000 into her account. She was indicted for first-degree criminal mistreatment.
Also, a doctor’s misdiagnosis should be examined. Every year there is a case of
patients who have been diagnosed as terminally ill but continue to live. However, if the patient
decides to be euthanized due to a misdiagnosis by the doctor, the patient loses the possibility of
living by a single mistake. There was a real-life case in Italy. Pietro D’Amico committed
euthanasia in Switzerland after being diagnosed by Italian and Swiss doctors but it was found out
he was not a terminal illness at all during an autopsy. If the illness wasn't terminal, the patient
could potentially receive a treatment that might cure the disease, allowing for more time with their family.
We should apply a "both/and" viewpoint by recognizing the significance of both personal independence and the sacredness of life to address this ethical dilemma better. This approach will examine the balance that regards a person's right to create end-of-life choices while also maintaining the natural value of life itself. Dr. Jack Kevorkian, known for helping in various
euthanasia cases, believed in engaging patients with terminal ailments to form end-of-life choices. (Davey and Lu 1) The expert’s approach gave people authority, underscoring the need for moral guidelines and shields to guarantee mindful decision-making. Besides, improving
palliative care and support frameworks is fundamental in this setting. Healthcare professionals
can provide an alternative to euthanasia that prioritizes the physical, emotional, and mental well-being of patients with life-limiting conditions by improving access to comprehensive
palliative care and supporting feedback system. This act addresses people's enduring and
strengthens life's sacredness by guaranteeing each possible avenue for comfort. At the same time,
healthcare professionals and society must work to move forward with palliative care and feedback systems. (Blain et al. 1) As a result, combining personal choices and better care can
give a more understanding approach to end-of-life choices.
The worldwide perspective on human euthanasia shifts day by day. For example,
euthanasia is legal in a few states but not in others in the United States (Scopetti et al. 1). This reflects the social and legislative differences inside the nation. On the other hand, Switzerland has a long history of allowing euthanasia, and they are expanding this benefit to non-residents. These varieties emphasize the significance of recognizing social contrasts and receiving customized approaches to legislation and patient care, rather than trying to apply them to
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
one-size-fits-all solutions. The "both/and" perspective allows us to regard and adjust to local perspectives and values, recognizing that what may work in one setting may not be applicable generally. This approach guarantees a more nuanced and sympathetic thought of the moral
situation of human euthanasia worldwide. (Kresin et al. 1) The "both/and" perspective allows us
to make specific rules and care for patients based on what people in a particular area believe
and value individually, their families and communities, etc.
It's crucial to consider how it affects healthcare professionals who often find themselves in the middle of this complex issue. This "both/and" perspective highlights the moral burden on healthcare providers, like doctors, nurses, and pharmacists. They have the challenging task of either supporting or refusing to assist in euthanasia, a decision that carries a heavy moral weight.
(Davey and Lu 1) Healthcare providers face the ethical challenge of balancing their duty to
preserve life with the patient's right to choose their fate. This inner ethical conflict is often emotionally draining as they try to align their commitment to healing with an individual's right to make their own decisions. The burden on medical professionals is significant, and understanding their moral struggle is an important aspect of addressing the complexity of this issue. In this
"both/and" approach, it's essential to respect conscientious objections within the healthcare community. Healthcare professionals who, based on their beliefs, cannot directly participate in euthanasia should have their objections acknowledged.
This means that healthcare education should establish clear guidelines that allow these providers to abstain from direct involvement without facing negative consequences. It's important to ensure that healthcare providers' sincere objections don't hinder patients' access to euthanasia as we navigate this delicate balance. An understanding approach involves creating alternative pathways for patients seeking euthanasia, such as specialized clinics or referral
systems. This approach respects both the autonomy of patients and the ethical positions of
healthcare professionals, promoting a more comprehensive and compassionate perspective on
human euthanasia. (Blain et al. 1) As a result, we honor both the independence of patients and
the ethical stances of medical professionals.
The moral assessment of human euthanasia crucially involves addressing potential
abuse. Significant concerns about involuntary euthanasia necessitate comprehensive
safeguards (Scopetti et al. 1). Such measures include obtaining multiple medical opinions to
protect the vulnerable and ensure alignment with the patient's genuine wishes. In Switzerland,
organizations like Dignitas require patients to undergo extensive evaluations, encompassing
medical and psychological assessments and a mandatory waiting period. This process
safeguards personal autonomy while preventing abuse, demonstrating a balanced approach
that marries patient autonomy with rigorous protective measures (Kresin et al. 1). This
method sets a responsible, ethical standard for euthanasia practices, promoting a nuanced and
compassionate approach to this ethical dilemma.
The 'either/or' perspective on euthanasia, focusing solely on unbearable pain relief,
contrasts with the 'both/and' approach, which emphasizes alternatives like enhanced comfort
care, mental health support, and hospice services. This broader view acknowledges practical
options for those facing terminal illnesses. The Marie Curie Hospice in the UK exemplifies
this, providing specialized care addressing medical, emotional, and psychological needs,
enabling patients to live their final days with dignity and comprehensive support (Davey and
Lu 1). This model illustrates the importance of expanding palliative care access as an
alternative to euthanasia, advocating for a balanced approach that respects individual choice
and life sanctity (Blain et al. 1). Emphasizing exploring such alternatives, this perspective
underscores the complexity of the ethical dilemma in euthanasia, advocating for thoughtful,
empathetic approaches that consider cultural nuances and prioritize patient care while
safeguarding vulnerable populations and upholding human dignity.
Horace, an ancient Roman poet, left these words. “Carpe diem” which means you have
to enjoy the present and be faithful to this moment. Human tends to face death and even think
about it. But “Memento mori”, remember death. As it is said, we must always remember the
death. Our lives are finite. How do you think your life will end? When you are with your
family? While sleeping and without pain? For those who are confronting death right now in
this moment, and for us who will die one day, considering this dilemma is significant.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Works Cited
“A Wrong Diagnosis.” Australian Care Alliance
,
www.australiancarealliance.org.au/a_wrong_diagnosis.
Accessed 10 Nov. 2023.
Blain, Janet., Stevens, Dean., Taylor, Louise., Kingston, Paul., and Watts, Geoffrey. “Views about euthanasia and dementia: Exploring perceptions utilizing evidence from the mass observation archive.” Healthcare, vol. 11, no. 18 2552. September 15, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11182552
“Carpe Diem.” Encyclopædia Britannica
, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc., 22 Sept. 2023,
www.britannica.com/topic/carpe-diem.
Davey, M., and Lu, Donna. ‘It was cruel’: Dying patient denied euthanasia in Catholic-run hospital. The Guardian News
, September 21, 2023.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/22/hospital-euthanasia-catholic-vi
ctoria Accessed on November 01
, 2023.
Kresin, Tracee, et al. “Attitudes and arguments in the voluntary assisted dying debate in Australia: What are they and how have they evolved over time?” International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health
, vol. 18, no. 23, Nov. 2021, p. 12327.
Crossref
, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312327
.
“Memento Mori.” Encyclopædia Britannica
, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc.,
www.britannica.com/topic/memento-mori
Schmahl, Olga, et al. “Request for euthanasia by a psychiatric patient with undetected intellectual disability.” BMJ case reports vol. 14,8 e239862. 17 Aug. 2021,
doi:10.1136/bcr-2020-239862
Scopetti, Matteo et al. “Assisted suicide and euthanasia in mental disorders: Ethical positions in
the debate between proportionality, dignity, and the right to die.” Healthcare, vol. 11, no.
10, 1470. May 18, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11101470
“Some Oregon and Washington State Assisted Suicide Abuses and Complications.”
Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
, 8 Nov. 2015,
dredf.org/public-policy/assisted-suicide/some-Oregon-assisted-suicide-abuses-and-
complications/