Medical Ethics Dax Cowart

What the physicians did was unethical since they ignore Dax’s wishes to stop the treatment and let him died. He really wanted to stop suffering from all the pain that he was going through. I know that he was unable to kill himself because his physical condition didn’t allow him neither assisted suicidal was an option however he continually beg to stop the treatment and just let him died. Again this is a right that should have been respected.

Some of the positive aspects of Dax being permitted to die would be that he would not have to endure such torturous treatments. He would not have to live his life permanently handicap and traumatized. He would not have gone through divorce so many times. It was never mentioned in the reading but he may have had survivor's guilt because his dad did not survive the accident. If the doctors put him out of his misery as he so pleaded he would not have to live with the guilt. There is a high possibility that he was ridiculed and made fun of because of his disfigurement. He would not have to worry about that if he were dead. He would not be alive so he would not have to live with anything that I just mentioned.

Finally, the reason for Dr. Death’s wrongful action is that he believed every man has the right to die. As a religious human being, I most definitely disagree. Most religions view suicide as one of the greatest sins. The act of taking one self’s life is

Physician-assisted suicide is arguably one of the most controversial issues of the twenty-first century. Anyone can kill themselves, but what happens when one is not capable of physically doing so and at the same exact time is also terminally ill. When is it okay for a physician to use their medical expertise, and oblige with a incurably patient; to agree that one’s life is worth ending. Where is the line drawn? Legally, physician-assisted suicide is a criminal offense; you are after all killing another human. Morally, is it okay to watch someone die in agonizing pain and stand-by because God told us all too. This essay will explore and analyze the legal aspect of physician-assisted suicide, what does the law say. As well as, the moral implications of physician-assisted suicide, it is ever okay, and the consequences it will have on our society.

There are instances when people who are terminally ill or severely injured who want to terminate their own lives. Sometimes, due to the state of their injuries or conditions, those people are unable to end their own pain. It is in many of these cases that the patients request assistance in their suicides. This kind of request is like to happen in facilities where the patient receives long term or permanent care. Physician assisted suicide is a hotly contested issue. There is support for those who believe this kind of "assistance" is morally, ethically, and otherwise wrong. There is support from people who believe that a person has a right to choose when his/her life ends. These people believe that physician assisted suicide is a form of altruistic assistance. There are valid points made by people on both sides of this issue and there is certainly room within the debate to be undecided or to be conflicted. Secondary, tertiary, and long term providers/facilities have the power to improve the preservation of life and they have the power to assist with the end of life. The paper presents arguments of this debate and reflects upon the issues at the surface as well as the underlying issues of the debate over physician assisted suicide.

According to Simon Jenkins, a writer for the British newspaper The Guardian, states that “there cannot be a human freedom so personal as ordering the circumstances of one's own death...[yet]... the near universal desire ‘to be allowed to die in my own home’ is willfully disregarded” (Jenkins 1). By allowing yourself to have life, one would assume that this gives you freedom over other aspects of your existence, including when it should end. By denying the rights to achieve liberty, achieve happiness, and define our lives, are we not denying the rights governments around the world were founded on? It is the denial of these rights that allows the mental stress felt by patients to turn into physical pain.

Physician-assisted suicide may change the perception of illness, disease, and pain. Because of this, physicians, patients, and family members may give up on recovery early (Westefeld, et al., 239). In contrast of cooperating in the death of a patient, people will seek to avoid it. This avoidance and denial of death may cause physicians to abandon their patients. This problem would be worsened by legalizing physician-assisted suicide because it would encourage the use of physician-assisted suicide when their disease worsened (Shannon & Kockler, 190). Legalizing physician-assisted suicide would also change the perspective the patient has about him or herself. The moral question of suicide is whether humans should have this responsibility over their own lives. Many argue that this act defies human dignity and that physician-assisted suicide exceeds human responsibility. Also, many people would assume sympathy in this situation, but some people may judge the patient for their use of physician-assisted suicide because it is using suicide to relieve pain (Shannon & Kockler, 191).

Many people have been faced with having to deal with hard truths of both life and death. One of these decisions that can be fronted to a person with a terminal illness may be what to do next. With what can be considered looming doom, one has to ingest the decisions of self, family and the pain that lies ahead. The debate over physician assisted suicide has been a long time argument wielding both positive and negative views exactly how a person should proceed once a decision has been made. Three questions are often asked in the attempt to argue the case for physician assisted suicide, that of legality, ethicalness, and morality. In the long run, the debate between the cause, effect and personal ideology that is social

One of the reasons opponents may propose against physician assisted death and Euthanasia has to do with the consent of the patient. There is a worry that because the patient is in an insurmountable amount of pain their judgment will be altered. Conversely, if the patient is not in insurmountable pain, then they are too inebriated from pain medication to make an intelligible decision. In either of the proposed situation the patient is unable to give consent knowledgeably (Class notes, 10/28). This argument, however, disregards the possibility of finding the balance of medication and pain for a patient to create a rational decision. Through discovering a balance of tolerable pain, the patient is then able to create

"Only because I knew that I could not and would not kill my patients was I able to enter most fully and intimately into caring for them as they lay dying (Doerflinger, Richard M., M.D, and Carlos F. Gomez, Ph.D). In this quote given by a physician, one sees that even from a professional’s standpoint on physician-assisted suicide, one is opposed to that act of helping someone to take his or her own life. When given the opportunity, this physician would rather help to improve the life of the patient rather than ending a life that does not need to end and that is the viewpoint that all should take on this controversial topic. Throughout this paper, one will see just how affected people are by the repercussions

When a patient finally comes to the conclusion that they would like to bring their lives to an end, they are to end or opt out of enduring physical and emotional torture. I believe that if he or she first has been diagnosed by multiple separate sources with no room for error regarding the severity and mortality of their disease, other individuals should not have the authority to deny this option of relief. This practice, over the past ten years, has consistently accounted for “approximately one out of every thousand deaths per year” which may appear insignificant, but “one in fifty patients talk to their doctor about it, and one in six talk with family members” (“Existing ‘Last Resorts’”, 1). Most of these candidates will find great solace

Facing the suffering of a serious and painful or unbearable medical condition, for which there is no hope of healing, is sometimes an intolerable situation. It can lead some patients to the deep desire of dying, hoping to end this suffering.

Most of the times, due to extensive suffering, most patients simply give up; with no hope left, they start to believe that the only way out of interminable pain and discomfort is to give up on their lives. Utter hopelessness makes them highly vulnerable and at the same time impulsive too. So, they easily fall victim to the temptation of ending up their own lives with just little assistance from people like Dr.

The idea of universalizability strongly suits this case. To universalize the patient’s individual maxim, we would see that most if not all will find suicide morally justifiable because everyone at times may feel depressed. At this point, we look at the duty to preserve life at all costs, and find we cannot universalize the patient’s maxim. Kant was tempted with this maxim, but his will finds it immoral. He once said, “I still have strength enough to take my life, but I hold this to be immoral. Whoever deprives himself of life is a beast…” The extreme idea of suicide also looks at self-love. She wants to feel better, so she thinks death will accomplish this. The problem here is with death, you don’t feel anything anymore. Another angle on this case looks at the patient using the

In this case Dax’s was fortunately survived from devastating accident and he return into new lifestyle. He enjoy to be alive but he is mention that the decision that made by his mother, doctors, lawyers and others was wrong. He believed that no one should not be forces to be alive each choose should be based on individual choose not others. He also emphasized that the important the quality of life means to him. I thought he was happy to be alive after hospitalization and return into his normal life but he was not happy to be alive which is very surprising me.