Ethical Issues Of Death And Dying

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

Death, dying and other ethical dilemmas are issues that all Intensive Care Units (ICUs) throughout the world have to face and address. In the Current Opinion in Critical Care, Vol 16, No 6, December 2010, p. 640, Dixon-Woods and Bosk, writing on the topic of “Death, dying and other ethical dilemmas” under the journal’s section of ‘Ethical, legal and organizational issues in the ICU’, have stated that “Recent ethnographic work suggests that ethical dilemmas associated with end-of-life care in ICU clearly persist, even if clinicians are now more open about patients’ chances of surviving. An Australian study identified how decisions and actions made

The right to assisted suicide is a controversial topic in healthcare in the United States. The debate goes back and forth about whether a dying competent patient has the right to die with the help of a physician. There is an abundant amount of people in the United States are against it because of religious beliefs. Some individuals believe that it is not morally right for a physician to assist in a patient’s death because it is not respecting the dying patient. Physician-patient assisted suicide divide physicians because many physicians differ when it comes to separating voluntarily killing a patient or killing the patient to respect their dying wish. Patients, who are gravely ill or in their final stages of life, often request for doctors to help them pass on by requesting medications such as morphine to help speed up their death because they are in pain. In healthcare, medical technology has come a long way to help lengthen a person’s life span. If a patient is actively dying from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), there are respiratory machines to aid in giving that patient oxygen to breath in more air which one could not achieve if the respiratory machine was not available to them. Medicine is intended to prevent diseases or allay the pain and suffering that a patient endures while going through medical treatments. Patients that are terminally ill should have the right to assisted suicide by a physician because it

A person should have the right to choose what medical interventions he or she would or would not have implemented in a life threatening situation, but euthanasia and physician assisted suicide (PAS) does not align with the code of ethics that health care providers are sworn to and, therefore, should not be practiced. Research has shown that only a fraction of individuals who qualify for end-of-life (EOL) care options, such as hospice, have heard about what options are available to them. Patients who seek out interventions such as euthanasia and PAS only do so because they feel that it is the only thing that will end their suffering. If such individuals were well informed about just how comprehensive, individualized, and effective EOL services such as hospice can be, euthanasia and PAS would quickly move down on the list of possibilities. We must, as a society, strive to inform and encourage those suffering with terminal illness, not simply end suffering by ending life itself.

The following ethics program will highlight some key ethical issues facing the healthcare industry as a whole, as well as hospice agencies specifically. In this program, I will reference ethical principles used today as well as reference historical ethicists and philosophers that backup the items outlined in this ethics program. There are two major topics to be discussed. The first will be how to treat patients that are at the end of their life, which includes their loved ones as well. A specific issue to be addressed in terms of patient care will be the option of doctor-assisted suicide, often called euthanasia, and why hospice should not support this. The other issue is that of data security and privacy, and how all patient information should be handled in the healthcare environment.

What exactly coerces someone to want to die? Is it the thought of dying while in excruciating pain? Is it because they are going to die soon anyway gripped by a terrible disease? Or is it because they have a mental illness that does not let go of their psychological well-being? These are only a few of the many reasons why someone might want to die today or tomorrow. Whether this is right or wrong is very controversial. Assisted suicide is very prevalent in today’s society, with five states deeming it legal and the remaining states considering it illegal. There are several major conflicting values and ethical principles within assisted suicide that may be in opposition to the code of ethics. However, the ethical principle of autonomy allows the patient to have control over their body and illness and die with dignity rather than with pain and suffering. The advanced practice nurse is an integral part of the interdisciplinary team in order to educate patients and recognize end of life concerns.

Terminally Ill patients across the world all want a way to end what they are going through, but not all doctor’s want to help them achieve those goals. The right to die is a patient’s ability to choose their own time and means of death. A patient’s death can be caused through injections of lethal drugs or even by taking them off of their life support by the request of the patient. Some people support this law because they believe that a patient should have the right to choose whether or not they would want a “dignified death” or a death not caused by an illness. The people opposing this law take the side of the sanctity of life and upholding the integrity of the medical profession by “maintaining bans on physician-assisted suicide” (Right to Die).

These issues can represent itself in discussions about palliative medicine, DNR orders, advance directive and physician assisted suicide. Many people have different thought on all of these subjects and it is often a topic of ethical debate. Each one of these topics can be the right choice for one patient and be morally wrong for another.

There is a very controversial ethical dilemma in the realm of medicine. It is the ethical rock bottom to some, while for others it marks an escape from their doomed state. This controversial topic is called “Physician-Assisted Death”, also sometimes referred to as “Assisted Suicide”. This issue is often an emotionally charged one, as many patients who request this type of service are terminally ill and wish to die peacefully, without pain, and with their dignity intact. Assisted death is not however legal for anyone who is not terminal, “if someone has a chronic illness that is not terminal, that individual is not eligible for assisted suicide under any proposal in the U.S., nor under the Oregon Death with Dignity Act.” (Golden, 2014) Many requests for assisted suicide are usually for one of the following reasons: “Being afraid of what the future may hold, experiencing burnout from unrelenting disease, having the wish and need for control, experiencing depression, or experiencing extremes of suffering, including refractory pain and other symptoms.” (Pereira, 2011)

Prompt: Write an essay that develop a position on the ethics of end of life care based on the six sources provided.

The argument against the notion of human euthanasia suggests that life is sacred and endurance of suffering is part life. In the article “The Economist: The Right to Die” suggests that individuals have the right to death rather than suffering a painful journey to death. Religious biases and culture heavily influenced my argument against human euthanasia. Although, I have not been able to experience extreme forms of diseases and physical impairments such as terminal cancer, being quadriplegic, or even having third degree burns on 90% of my body. In most of the circumstances mentioned, individuals suggest that the quality of life is not worth living and death is a far better option. Although euthanasia can be perceived as a better option for certain individuals, there are concerns revolving around this notion. Medical assistance can get very costly, especially for lower income families. There exists the risk of sick patients from lower income families being susceptible to exploitation by “rogue doctors, grasping relatives, miserly insurers or cash strapped states” (The Right to Die 1). Another major concern to be taken into account is the idea that the sick and elderly have a duty to die. The notion that “the remaining goal in life is not to be a burden to their loved ones” (The Duty to Die versus The Duty to Stay Alive 1) and save family members from pain and economic constraints is tragic. It is this notion in particular that leaves patients vulnerable and in turn stain the pursuit of death. External factors such as economic, family and social constraints should not be deciding factors to choosing

There has been an ongoing battle whether or not euthanasia or physician assisted suicide should be legal. Whether or not is ethical for a physician to assist in a person 's death. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is causing the death of a person who is disease, suffering from a condition that is not curable. To end their suffering the individuals end their lives, but are important to keep in consideration that in order for the individual to make such a big decision they must be in the right state of mind. One of the greatest moral issues that we are facing is the principle of freedom. Whether or not individuals should have the right or not to choose what they are going to do with their live. Keeping in consideration that freedom was on what

In the world we live in today, hospitals, medical institutions, and health services all treat patients that are not only sick but also undergoing tremendous amounts of pain and suffering due to their suffering. While some patients have be cured of their diseases and sicknesses, others that are terminally ill are facing a difficult question of whether their life is worth living given the circumstances. Although this may seem rather ethical for the patient to choose, hospitals nowadays are also tasked with a taxing decision, “Is euthanasia, the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma, wrong? Is it ethical to, not only actively euthanize a patient, but also to passively, “allow Nature to take its course with [the patient]” and end the suffering of the patient.

Ethnical issue relation to “End-of-Life” comes into discussion “when decisions arise concerning the treatment of dying patients, these options present complex ethical dilemmas.” (Minnesota, 2005) We will discuss on Dilemmas such as Withdrawing and withholding treatment and physician-assisted suicide

Living in the twenty-first century we have seen many great strides in the advancement of medicine and life-sustaining technologies. These advances have resulted in improved life expectancies and quality of life for people around the globe. These medical improvements have raised questions about the appropriateness of life-sustaining treatments in the case of people who are terminally ill and experiencing severe pain and suffering. Are we robbing people of a dignified death by artificially maintaining their bodily systems? Should we really prolong life because we fear death, even though the patients themselves may be ready to die? These questions have received a great deal of attention in recent years, and many people are looking toward euthanasia for the answer.