Analysis of an Ethical Dilemma Essay

Physician assisted suicide or PAS is a controversial topic in the world today. But the important question is, should physician assisted suicides be allowed in cases such as: the patient’s suffering is far too great and there is no chance of them getting better? This is a highly debated issue, that has activist groups on both sides fighting for what they think is the right thing to do. Physician assisted suicides can stop the excruciating pain a patient is in, especially if there is nothing that can be done to stop the pain. Or it can be done for a patient that fully understands that there is nothing that can be done to save their life, so as not to put their loved ones into financial hardship. In this

Nurses are faced with ethical dilemmas every day. There are a lot of different beliefs surrounding ethics and the code of ethics. Ethics and ethical issues have always existed, that is why they have put in place the code of ethics. The American Nursing Association (ANA) Code of Ethics isa guideline to help nurses determine which course of action to pursue. Every minute many ethical decisions are made, some may not comply with guidelines and others the patient’s will never understand. In this case study the nurse is put in an uncomfortable position and has two find a way to comply with the family, the patient, and the doctor’s orders.How can she report to the doctor the information the daughter has told her? How she approached

Ezekiel Emanuel once said, “Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia have been profound ethical issues confronting doctors since the birth of Western medicine, more than 2,000 years ago.” Physician assisted suicide (PAS) should be available as a dignified option for the terminally ill because it can be built in to the palliative care plan formulated by patient and Doctor, may alleviate some medical costs for the incurable, and it’s a moderated and humane way to end a person’s suffering.

The American movement to expand legal access to physician-assisted suicide has been waging on for decades, making significant progress in humanizing death with dignity and reducing the social taboos against the movement, but has made relatively little progress in creating federally protected access to physician-assisted suicide. It is fundamental that physicians and insurance companies are involved and actively working with the PAS movement

Additionally, the Schindlers impassioned pleas to save their daughters life to the residents of Florida resulted in more than 100,000 communications to Governor Jeb Bush requesting he sign legislation making it illegal to remove Terri’s feeding tube. As a result the governor intervened and signed “Terri’s Law” allowing her feeding tube to be reinserted. As recently as October 2004, Governor Bush stated “I personally don't want to be a party to removing a feeding tube that causes us to take an innocent life” (Bell, 2004). However emphatically the Governor supports this law, the Florida Supreme Court denied his request to reconsider it’s ruling in favor of removing Terri’s feeding tube. The date for removal has not been set.

On February 28, 1990, twenty six-year old Terri Schiavo suffered severe brain damage when her heart stopped for five minutes. Terri's condition was the subject of intense debate and media scrutiny over the subject of euthanasia and guardianship. Given the circumstances of Terri's vegetated condition, and no physical proof of her wishes, the last word on whether or not Terri would stay alive was given to her husband Michael Schiavo, by the state of Florida. Michael's argument was that he was carrying out her wishes to not be kept alive in that state. Terri's family challenged Michael's claims saying she is responsive and in no discomfort, that her condition does not meet the medical definition of

In the CRUZAN v. DIRECTOR, MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 497 U.S. 261 (1990) case that was presented to the Supreme Court in 1990 was about a woman named Nancy Beth Cruzan and her right to die. The According to thesciencewritinblog.com, “On January 11, 1983 Nancy Beth Cruzan’s car overturned when she was driving home from her job at a cheese factory. She was found face down in a ditch, and although paramedics restarted her heart, 15 minutes without oxygen left her with severe brain damage (Science and Law).” Cruzan stayed in a diligent vegetative state in which she showed no intellectual capacity, yet had reflexes after waking up from her 3 week coma. Cruzan parents wanted take off life support but the hospital refused to do so without a court order because there was no living will so there was no evidence to support that Nancy would have wanted that for herself.

The case went all the way to New Jersey Supreme Court before it was finally resolved. The state of New Jersey argued that the request to remove the ventilator should be denied because of the state preservation of life policy. The plaintiff argue for that this infringed upon the right to privacy individuals have because people have the right to refuse medical help, only if they are mentally competent however. The Supreme Court of New Jersey agreed that because the right to privacy was a penumbra right, a right that is implied by the United States Constitution, if Karen Quinlan was to gain competency, with the assumption that she would then fall back in the persistent vegetative state, she should have the right to decide whether or not to remove the life supporting ventilator. The main reason of concern was the she was in a state that did not allow her to give an answer, and she did not have a living will, a legal document that tells what the person wants to happen to them should they be incapacitated, but that her father was the person deciding if the tube should be

The ethical principles for nurses to practice with beneficence and no maleficence. This legal battle between Terri Schiavo’s husband and her family was an ethical debate between continuing artificial life or remove her feeding tube by the request of her husband. Using the theories of utilitarianism and deontology can be applied or considered in making the most ethically correct resolution. The cases are very complex and raise many moral and ethical issues. The cases have brought awareness to society of “the importance of discussing end-of-life issues with family members and underscores how an advance directive, a living will and/or durable power of attorney for health care, are a healthcare proxy clarifies and provides evidence of the wishes of an individual regarding end-of-life decisions. Terri Schiavo should impress upon laypersons and professionals alike the uncertainty of the context in which issues of continuation and termination are argued ethically. Nobody knows what Mrs. Schiavo would have wanted. She left no advance directive and in its absence her husband says one thing and her parents

Terri Schiavo was 26 years old when she collapsed in her home and suffered acute hypoxia for several minutes. Slightly shy of a year after her injury, it was clinically determined that she was in a persistent vegetative state (Perry, Churchill, & Kirshner, 2005). There were no legal documents, such as an advance directive or living will, specifying the wishes for care under such circumstances. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, was designated as her legal guardian. The Schiavo case caught the public’s attention when her husband elected to remove her feeding tube in the mid 1900’s. He understood that there has never been a case of recovery after a year of being in a persistent vegetative state. One of the moral issues surrounding the case centered on the appropriateness of removing the life-sustaining feeding tube or maintaining it. Throughout the case, there has

They were the subjects of public disputes with family members, court systems, medical professionals, the media, and society at large. Terri Schiavo, Nancy Cruzan and Karen Ann Quinlan; their names are synonymous with permanent vegetative state (PVS). The amazing technological advancements in modern medicine has been credited with keeping persons alive who in times past would have died, therefore this is remarkable for countless families. In the cases of the Quinlan’s, the Cruzan’s and many like them, families members find it unbearable to witness loved ones who linger indefinitely in PVS with little or no chance for recovery. There are many like Terri Schiavo’s parents, who value the lives of their love ones no matter how limited their

An ethical dilemma is an incident that causes us to question how we should react based on our beliefs. A decision needs to be made between right and wrong. I have experienced many ethical dilemmas in my lifetime, so I know that there is no such thing as an ethical dilemma that only affects one person. I also know that some ethical dilemmas are easier to resolve than others are. The easy ones are the ones in which we can make decisions on the spot. For example, if a cashier gives me too much change, I can immediately make a decision to either return the money or keep it. Based on Kant’s, categorical imperative there are two criteria for determining moral right and wrong. First, there is universalizability, which states, “the person’s

In the USA the law varies in some states. A turning point in the euthanasia debate occurred after a public outcry over the Karen Ann Quinlan (1954-1985) case age 21 who lost consciousness. She was kept on life support while in a vegetative state until court decisions were ruled in her parents favor to withdraw treatment. She was then removed from the ventilator where she eventually died of pneumonia. Even today, Quinlan's case raises important questions in moral theology, bioethics, euthanasia, legal guardianship and civil rights. Health care professionals say her case has had an impact on medical and legal practice worldwide. Many say the development of advance health directives (living wills) occurred as a result of her case. A living will

The autonomy of a competent patient is an issue not often debated in medical ethics. Refusal of unwanted treatment is a basic right, likened to the common law of battery, available to all people capable of a competent choice. These fundamental rules of medical ethics entered a completely new forum as medical technology developed highly effective life-sustaining care during the 20th century. Several watershed cases elucidated these emerging issues in the 1960’s and 70’s, none more effectively than that of Karen Ann Quinlan. Fundamentally, this case established that a once-competent patient without the possibility of recovery could have their autonomy exercised by a surrogate in regard to the

Everyday we are tested as individuals to make the right choice. How we view ourselves as individuals and how others view us are directly correlated to our moral decision-making. But morals are somewhat misleading. What might be a wrong decision for one person might be a solution to another. So how do we define morals? Do we follow Gods’ moral rules because to do so would increase out likelihood of obtaining salvation in the afterlife? Or is it simpler than that. Is God going to deny our entrance into heaven because we have run a stop sign here and there? No. I believe our moral values are much simpler than that. I believe that our moral decision-making comes from our upbringing of what is right or wrong. Our parents and