Death And Life Threatening Illnesses

A person’s life can end at any age. They can depart quickly or slowly. End of life care, also known as palliative care, is the care of patients that are not only in their final hours or days but the patients with a terminal illness that has become incurable. End of life care takes into mind what the patient desires so it is recommended that they consider an advanced care plan also known as an advance directive and living will. These documents allow the patient to formulate decisions on the future of their care if, at any point, they cannot vocally express themselves.

Death is inevitable. It is one of the only certainties in life. Regardless, people are often uncomfortable discussing death. Nyatanga (2016) posits that the idea of no longer existing increases anxiety and emotional distress in relation to one’s mortality. Because of the difficulty in level of care for end-of-life patients, the patient and the family often need professional assistance for physical and emotional care. Many family caregivers are not professionally trained in medicine, and this is where hospice comes into play. Hospice aims to meet the holistic needs of both the patient and the patient’s family through treatment plans, education, and advocacy. There is a duality of care to the treatment provided by hospice staff in that they do not attempt to separate the patient’s care from the family’s care. Leming and Dickinson (2011) support that hospice, unlike other clinical fields, focuses on the patient and the family together instead of seeing the patient independent of the family. Many times in hospitals, the medical team focuses solely on the goal of returning the patient back to health in order for them to return to their normal lives. They do not take into account the psychological and spiritual components of the patient’s journey and the journey that the family must take as well. For treatment of the patient, Leming and Dickinson agree that hospice does not attempt to cure patients, and instead concentrates solely

The World Health Organisation (2010) defines palliative care as: An approach that improves the quality of life of patients and their families facing problems associated with life threatening illness, through the prevention and relief of suffering by means of early identification and impeccable assessment and treatment of pain and other problems, physical, psychosocial and spiritual. It is also our duty to support John and his wife`s in their decision for John to die at home, Department of health (2008) patients should have a choice over the care they receive and where.

“Is it worse to kill someone than to let someone die?” – James Rachels. At the end of the disagreement, many philosophers say euthanasia, also known as physician-assisted suicide, is a compassionate method of death. At the other side are the opponents of euthanasia, who may consider this technique as a form of murder. In this paper, I will show that it is not important to know the distinction between killing and letting die on request which is performed by a physician. Both killing and letting die on request are similar because it is based on the controversial issue called euthanasia also known as physician-assisted suicide.

Caring for patients at the end of life is a challenging task that requires not only the consideration of the individual as a whole but also an understanding of the

A Life or Death Situation, by Robin Marantz Henig, New York Times, July, 2013, is a review of the debate surrounding the right to a dignified death. It examines the purely philosophical view of the issue; as well as the heart wrenching reality of being faced with that question in one 's personal life. Does a person have a right to choose how he or she dies? How does that choice impact the people who care about about him or her? Should a person who cares about someone be required to cause or aide in his or her death? These questions weigh heavy on the minds of many people, who live

Palliative care is a relatively new concept, stemming from the hospice movement of the 1960s. This type of care focuses on the quality of life of its patients at any time in their treatment process. Palliative care is a concept that is often used synonymously with hospice care. Although it can be congregated with hospice care, they are not the same thing. Thus, it can easily be misunderstood. Sherner (2015) explains that both clinicians and people alternate palliative care and hospice. Unfortunately, she says, these people believe that palliative care implies the patient is refusing curative care. The purpose of this analysis is to explore the concept, clarify the meaning, and differentiate the concept of palliative care.

Palliative care, somewhat similar to Hospice care, focuses on relieving or preventing suffering from a life altering illness. The goal for both Palliative and Hospice care is to provide the best possible quality of life to

According to Ullmann-Margalit (51) while dealing with the subject the agony of doubt deliberates that it is among the most confusing issues to deal with. Most people do not want to die, at least not now, and the debate of holding on to the inevitable and that of letting go heats up. Questions arise concerning the social, religious and ethical factors that have to be taken into play while considering end-of-life or right-to-die and thus bringing complexity to an otherwise easy decision. But the most crucial question to ask is: are those in support of the right-to-die justified in their movement? This will be the question that will be addressed in this argumentative essay.

This assignment will discuss a case involving an individual known to me. It centres on the real and contentious issue of the “right to die”, specifically in the context of physician-assisted death. This issue is widely debated in the public eye for two reasons. The first considers under what conditions a person can choose when to die and the second considers if someone ever actually has a ‘right to die’. The following analysis will consider solutions to the ethical dilemma of physician-assisted death through the lens of three ethical theories. It will also take into account the potential influence of an individual’s religious beliefs

Voluntary Euthanasia has been considered a controversial topic for many decades. The idea of committing an act that involves the taking of human life is not one that many people would care to discuss openly. The main argument is that a person who has been diagnosed with an incurable illness and is in extreme pain and their ability to move has been limited, while that person still has control over their destiney should they be allowed take their own life (Bowie, R.2001). The worldwide debate weather one should be allowed to end a life is still one of the biggest ethical issues. The attempt to providing the rights of the individual is in conflict with the moral values of society. Voluntary Euthanasia has been highly rejected by many religious and pro-life institutions.

There are some ethical dilemmas evident in this scenario, starting with an End of life dilemma, refusal of care and informed consent.“End of

The “Right to Die” (Euthanasia) should be further looked into as an option for terminally ill patients and not considered unethical. There has been an issue concerning the topic of “Human Euthanasia” as an acceptable action in society. The research compiled in conjunction with an educated opinion will be the basis for the argument for voluntary Euthanasia in this paper. Patients suffering from an incurable illness, exhausting all medical treatments, should be given the freedom of choice to continue their path of suffering or end it at their own will. “The Right to die” is not suicide, as you are fully aware that death will be certain, as Euthanasia spares the individual of additional pain.

In end-of-life scenarios, where the patient may not be able to communicate their wishes, decisions must be made either by the healthcare professional(s) or family member(s). However, who gets to decide or where the line should be drawn are not always clear. Consequently, not all decisions may be ethically permissible. To illustrate, I will discuss a scenario in which physicians and family are not in agreement. Upon proving a brief summary and explaining the ethical dilemma, I will provide moral reasons for two ethically permissible choices from which, by referencing the principle of autonomy and Utilitarianism, will determine which course of action ought to be carried out.

Today we are face with death in a different setting then our ancestors, instead of dying at a younger age and dying in our home with our families, people are now dying at a hospital or in a medical setting. We are living longer because of the advances in medicine, this is causing us to develop diseases that our ancestors never had to face. Our ancestors did not live long enough to develop some of the diseases we face today. As Jones (2011) provides, “we don’t just die of different diseases then our ancestors, we also die in different circumstances” (p. 302). The changes in circumstances have caused us to reevaluate what is believed to be ethical when faced with dying. There are many medical options a terminal ill or elderly patient that is dying can choose from, however there is great debate whether some of these options are ethical.