Bioethics

Bioethics is a very diverse and subjective issue in Buddhism that bases its self around fundamental Buddhist laws such as the five precepts, the four Noble Truths and The Noble Eightfold path. Each Buddhist variant approaches bioethics differently based on the variants primary goal, ideals or practices. However all Buddhists views of bioethics are somewhat influenced by the universal goal of Buddhism to become liberated from the constant cycle of reincarnation or samsara. In conjecture with Buddhism, the occurrence of samsara allows for one to attain a new view on everything including bioethics allowing for the chance to discover or come to an ultimate realisation which in turn allows for the ultimate realisation of issues relating to

In discussing the difficult subject of biomedical ethics, there are different scenarios that play out differently because of people’s views about morality. Consider the scenario of an eighty year-old man whom we will call Mr. Simpson. Years of getting the flu with complications has left Mr. Simpson’s lungs very weak and unable to take another year of the flu. In fact another year of the flu will likely kill him. He does not want the flu shot because he sincerely believes that the actual flu shot will give him the flu. With further research, the doctor and the family find that Mr. Simpson will accept an immune boosting shot only. If the physician lies to Mr. Simpson about the injection then he will

In the prompt this week, we consider the moral issues involved in the Lockes’ decision to donate their unused frozen embryos for research. In avoiding personal beliefs and using the information provided by Robert Veatch in the book The Basics of Bioethics, I conclude that there is no definitive yes or no answer to the question of whether the Lockes’ actions were moral. Instead, we can pose how one might consider the actions by the Lockes to be morally impermissible and we can also present the case that their actions were morally permissible.

World governments have frequently relied on unknowing participants and or prisoners of war for experimentation. While these experiments range vastly concerning procedures, outcomes, and justification, they all existed to outsmart international enemies efficiently. The government bioethics conspiracy I researched is Project MKUltra. This was a secretive CIA program that experimented with mind control, hallucinogenic drugs, and the behavioral engineering of humans from 1953 to 1973. Because the program existed for a couple decades, it encompassed a wide-range of experiments, types of patients, and immense secrecy. More often than not, test subjects were not aware of tests to be conducted and thought they were participating in standard medical tests at first. Despite the program coming to a halt, many believe human experimentation is still ongoing and don’t see a future without secret government research.

Physicians should respect the patients decision to abandon life continuing treatment, deliberately causing death is morally impermissible.

right to choose what happens to his or her own body, but the life of a patient should not be put

The law also allows a physician to deny performing the treatment for personal beliefs. Yet, if the harm is done and the patient is incurable, the doctor can save tremendous pain and suffering of patients. With the multitude of obstacle courses the protocol have set in place, have been thought out and designed to protect the rights of not only the patient but

W.D Ross’s moral decisions need to be outweighed depending on how the situation is presented, such as insisting that an elderly woman stay hospitalized to watch over her health conditions instead of allowing her to go home, where she could be more at risk for accidents. Ross’s theory includes a list of duties that supports the role a physician has in this manner. Physicians have a duty to fidelity in which they are truthful to their pledges, words, and loyalty. Allowing a patient to walk out of a hospital, knowing that their choice is irrational, is a decision that raises concern for the physician because their goals are to save and preserve the life of their patients, not to put them at risk. A duty of beneficence is to improve the conditions of others or to do good for them. Now that it’s known that a physician under oath has committed him or herself to save lives, they must also make decisions that best determines the well-being of the patient. In terms of their values, physicians have a duty to not inflict harm to the patients. If a physician sends a patient home knowing that their health needs to be watched and allows it because of the patient’s refusal to treatment, is failing to meet their own goals.

The principles of justice, nonmaleficence, and beneficence must be considered in this situation as the patient herself has neither voice nor living will expressing her desires. An ethical theory that applies to this situation is rule utilitarianism. This theory is a hybrid of deontological and utilitarian approaches (Purtilo & Doherty, 2012). Terri’s husband feels that he is legally honoring her wishes by allowing Terri to die as the natural consequence of her unfortunate medical condition. Using the utilitarian theory removing her feeding tube justifies the end goal of death. For her family, they feel a duty to Terri and having her feeding tube removed betrays their sense of duty and right. Conflict resolution, in this case, must consider promoting the person’s good or prevention of further harm to the patient. Ethical theories and principles can guide the best

fields like cloning, stem cell research, and gene manipulation. Cloning is able to help those

Romeo and Juliet is the most commonly remembered Shakespearean tragedies. How can someone come to conclusion that Juliet should not have ended her life just because she lost her love since they believe that life is very precious; or how can someone conclude Juliet has a right to commit suicide because it's her life after all and she has her moral beliefs and killing yourself is part of it? There are a lot of topics that can be debated in the same way and one of them is a conscientious objection in medicine. In the Ishmael Bradley article, “Conscientious Objection in Medicine: A Moral Dilemma” he argues that even though as a physician there might be times when a patient will ask to do something that can go against the physician's moral belief, he suggests that at that given moment it is physicians job to put patients’ interest before their own. Same time Beau Watts in his article, “Embryonic Stem Cell Research: A Moral Evil or Obligation?” argues that if embryos help improve the quality of life, then it is society’s responsibility to use the resource which means that if using one embryo can save 1,000 life then it is putting the embryos into good use. If Watts were to read Bradleys’ article then Watts would mostly support the arguments because even though morality is an important part of physicians, lifestyle; patients interest is more important and also because laws are implemented for everyone’s good even if not everyone agrees however, Watts would disagree with Bradley's opinion on physician referral policy. Overall, Watts would agree with Bradley.

Witcombe, J., & Sanchez, J. (2004). Food systems and security helping the poor cope. Retrieved from http://www.id21.org/health/InsightsHealth5art3.html

There are four basic ethical and bioethical principles that have a strong influence in the practice of medicine, predominantly medicine that deals with those who are dying. The first is beneficence, which directs the physician and health care worker to take positive actions, specifically by restoring health and relieving suffering (Bongard et al., 2008). Then there is nonmaleficence. Goldman and Schafer (2012) add that nonmaleficence is the idea that people should not be harmed or injured knowingly. The third ethical principle is autonomy,

Bioethics focus is about making better decisions when faced with diverse and complex circumstances. It is defined as the responsibilities we have to other human beings regarding the following issues; the nature of life, the nature of death, what sort of life is worth living, what constitutes murder and how we should treat people who are especially vulnerable (Pozgar, 2016, p.3). Known as a multidisciplinary field of study, bioethics is comprised of philosophy, theology, history, and law with medicine, nursing, health policy, and the medical humanities ("What is bioethics," 2017).

The bioethics case study that was assigned to me is about a tricky court case between two individuals, Junior and Mary who just got divorced. Before Junior and Mary got divorced they had infertility problems which led them to undergo the process of in vitro fertilization, the process resulted in nine embryos, two were implanted, but failed in developing. Now, Junior and Mary are both competing for the ownership of the embryos left frozen. Both parties have lawyers, Junior wanted the embryos just to destroy them and Mary wanted to implant the embryos. The in vitro fertilization is considered as one of reasons that led to their divorce. Junior’s lawyer claimed that