Doctor-Assisted Suicide Case Study

This is a case study that will be examined and evaluating a 68-year-old male, husband that killed his wife per her request. Allowing someone to die has always been a sociological concern. Will take into consideration the ethical values as well as providing proposed solutions on how this can benefit the husband and wife as well as the family, even though they have moved away. During this process, will look at possible treatments, suggestions that will result in a better outcome.

Since diamond is such a durable material, it can only be cut by another diamond.

Thirty-six year old James Foster accompanied by his wife Megan signs his do-not-resuscitate order (DNR). Both Mr. Foster and his wife are understanding of what a do-not-resuscitate order is and are in agreeance. James has stage IV prostate cancer, but he is young and his wife believes he will pull through. A month passes, and early one morning James stops breathing, the patient is coding. Nurse Compton rushes in along with other medical professionals. Mrs. Foster is screaming, “Save him. Save him. Do whatever it takes to save him. Do not let him die.” Nurse Compton knows that Mr. Foster has a do-not-resuscitate order on file and feels not only sad in regards to the situational pain that Mrs. Foster is exhibiting, but morally conflicted with

The thing that kept Steven going was the thought that Jeffrey having cancer was going to be a mistake. During Jeffrey’s stay at the Philadelphia Children's hospital Steven was kept unnotified of how Jeffrey was doing. Apart of that he was getting no attention whatsoever from either of his parents. Steven felt forgotten and this brought anger. Through journals from Miss Palma’s class he wrote about how nobody had thought about how he was feeling about this situation. However when Jeffrey and his mother returned from Philadelphia Steven learned that the thoughts he had was wrong.

Advances in medical treatments have raised the average life expectancy of people in Canada. However, it fails to guarantee a perfectly healthy life for people who experience incurable diseases. The rising interest in Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide in Canada, is an outcome of the desire of people to have a greater control over their lives in terms of their capacity to determine death when the patients are terminally ill.

According to Paul J. van der Wal et al. in ¨Euthanasia, Physician-Assisted Suicide, and Other Medical Practices Involving the End of Life in the Netherlands, 1990–1995¨, he addresses that assisted suicide should be legal and regulated. The authors’ purpose of writing this journal article is to make reliable estimates of euthanasia; to describe patients and physicians, and to evaluate changes between 1990 and 1995. Even though assisted suicide is a growing taboo, it is being practiced more each and every day. Paul J. van der Wal et al. chose to conduct two studies to answer their hypotheses.

“Someone call 911”, I said, when I saw a girl fall down the stairs lying unconscious. The nurse at Rockdale County High School assisted with the situation. My friend Fred and I held her so she wouldn’t hurt herself any more than had already been done. The nurse notified us that this girl has epilepsy (meaning that a person has had two or more seizures, but it’s not contagious & is not caused by mental illness or mental retardation). I didn’t pay too much attention to what the nurse was saying because I was focused on the girl's breathing and her ability regain consciousness. The nurse insisted on calling her sister to be there for her when she wakes up. The nurse knew that when she would wake up, she would want to hug one of us or her sister because all she remembers is blacking out during the time it took place.

Petitioners in this case are the State of Washington and its Attorney General. Respondents Harold Glucksberg, Abigail Halperin, Thomas A. Preston, and Peter Shalit, are medical physicians who practice in the State of Washington, along with three gravely ill, pseudonymous plaintiffs who have since died and the non-profit organization that counsel people considering physician-assisted suicide, Compassion in Dying, sued in the United States District Court, seeking a declaration that Wash Rev. Code 9A.36.060(1) (1994) was unconstitutional. Washington vs. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997). The Washington State statute provided a person was guilty of the felony of promoting a suicide attempt when the person knowingly caused or aided another person

of life. Death is inevitable. Why should each of us not have the right to

Physician-Assisted suicide (PSA) is the voluntary termination of a life by prescription medication given by a doctor. Five states in the United States, including California, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and Montana, have given the public the choice to end their lives with prescription medication. In Montana, the choice to end a person’s life is made through the court’s decision. In Oregon, the physician must also be willing to go through with the choices of the patient. The physician who is to give the medicine must be a licensed doctor of medicine. Those who want to end their lives must be terminally ill and have less than 6 months to live. Physician-Assisted suicide is often confused with euthanasia. The difference between the two is that PSA is the request and consent of an ill patient who knows how they would like to pass. Euthanasia is the intent of ending a life to relieve pain or suffering through mercy. Ill patients, who have 6 months or less to live, should be given the choice to end their lives how they would like to.

Many Americans are diagnosed with a terminal illness each day. Hearing that kind of news and knowing there is less than a year left to live and the quality of life would no doubt be heartbreaking. During the last few months of a terminal patient’s life they are often in tremendous pain and suffering. Those with terminal illnesses are treated with life prolonging measures including chemotherapy and radiation. These treatments and the illness itself often leave the patient 's feeling as if they are a shell of who they were and miserable. “Numerous ailments such as certain types of cancer result in a slow, agonizing death” (Messerli, Joe). Physician Assisted Suicide allows

Oregon, the first state to legalize PAS in 1997, passed the Death with Dignity Act (DWDA) which allowed patients to end their life by taking a lethal dose of a medication prescribed by a physician. In the article, “The Case for Physician Assisted Suicide: How Can It Possiblye Be Proven?,” the authors, E. Dahl and N. Levy, state that the proponents of PAS believe that there have been several reports of terminally ill patients abusing the DWDA which can be caused by mental illnesses or depression. Due to the possibility of physicians abusing the right to prescribe terminally ill patients lethal doses of a medication, many doubt whether physicians should play a large role in the process of PAS. In the article, “Should Psychiatrists Serve as

There are many differences between PAS and euthanasia, let 's take a look at some of them. Physician assisted suicide means that the physician makes lethal means available to the patient, that can be used when the patient chooses. PAS is also defined as a patient who died by performing the last act of suicide. Euthanasia would mean the physician takes an active role in carrying out the patient 's request. For the patient to receive PAS, they would have to take the medication when they are still capable of swallowing or able to inject a lethal dosage of medication into his or herself. For the patient to receive euthanasia, the doctor would have to be the direct cause of the patient 's death. Because the patient must be competent of killing his or herself for PAS, one of the fears is that the patient will feel the need to take their life at an unnecessary time so they will still be able to before they become incapable. Euthanasia may give more time for the patient to be talked out of or accept other options for their terminal illness before their life is taken. There is more of a chance that a mistake will be made during PAS than there is for Euthanasia because the doctor will be there the whole time and assist the patient in death him or herself. Both will have the same outcome, they are just different options for the patient.

Just imagine…the invitation arriving in the mail, it was no ordinary invite. The days of physical misery and suffering that lead up to this final celebration of life were unbearable to watch. Having a terminally ill family member is hard because you know the days, weeks and months are numbered. Quality of life, what is that anyway? Each passing hour has the quality of life diminishing to unimaginable physical pain and anguish. Watching someone you love slip away and turn into a shell of who they once were is unbearable. This invitation is special. This special day and every precious hour will give the loved ones a time to say goodbye just before they die with dignity in physician assisted suicide. Terminally ill patients have the right to end their own lives using physician assisted suicide (PAS) without repercussions of laws and people with opposing opinions.

This is 51 year old WF. Patient has several issues. Patient's mental healthe is followed by JBS. Patient's Current medications are Zertec, prilosec, topamax, effexor. Patient's been out of her zyrtec, prilosec for the past 3 weeks. Patient states her GERD is back. Sharp burning sensation, this is a chronic issue for the patient. Patient aslo have a degenerative joint of Right knee, patient reports pain is 5-6/10 daily, acceptable pain isd 3-4/10. Patient brought medical record and chart's been reviewed. Patient is to comeback in one week for additional follow up. Patient states her depressive moods are well managed with current plan of care by JBS. Patient denies thoughts of suicide or homicide. Patient has a history of attempted suicide.