Euthanasia And Physician Assisted Suicide Case Study

On the other hand, voluntary euthanasia is described as a situation in which the critically ill patient requests from someone else to help them die. They may either influence someone to assist them in suicide, or refuse life-saving medical treatment (Ramabele, 2004).

In recent times, there has been much debate about whether or not Euthanasia should be permitted. Voluntary Euthanasia is when terminally ill people wish to have their lives ended with the assistance of medical procedures before nature takes its course. This is because they may be suffering and in great pain, or cannot live a reasonable or comfortable life. Voluntary Euthanasia should be introduced, provided that there are safeguards to stop the system from being misused.

When we hear the phrase voluntary euthanasia people generally think of one of two things: the active termination of life at the patient's or the Nazi extermination program of murder. Many people have beliefs about whether euthanasia is right or wrong, often without being able to define it clearly. Some people take an extreme view, while many fall somewhere between the two camps. The derivation means gentle and easy death coming from the Greek words, eu - thanatos. Euthanasia was formerly called "mercy killing," euthanasia means intentionally making someone die, rather than allowing that person to die naturally. Put bluntly, euthanasia means killing in the name of compassion.

Being able to decide the fate of your own life is not an easy decision to make, and is not something to be toyed with. However, when someone is in a desperate situation, and must choose before they lose their mind (quite literally), death may be more appealing, instead of living, and being forced to suffer. By legalizing euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, we would provide “vulnerable” patients with better overall protection and health care, give patients (who are excruciatingly suffering and have no chance of recovery) the option to end their lives before they ever needed to go through such an ordeal and giving them peace of mind, and spare the families of the patients the emotional pain of watching their loved one slowly and painfully passing away. For these reasons, I believe that euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide should be legalized in Canada.

Patients suffering from terminal illnesses, battle feeling worthless and hopeless on a daily basis. This is due to our jurisdiction forcing them to live. The number of people suffering continues to increase. Although a doctor’s position is to prolong life, euthanasia should be considered in certain cases. Because of the advances in technology euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are now an option for terminally ill patients who are going to suffer from an incurable and painful disease or are in an irreversible coma. Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should be legalized because the public supports it, it would only be used for patients who are terminally ill, and it alleviates unnecessary suffering. The word euthanasia originates

Euthanasia is categorized in various forms. The first category deals with the patient’s consent. Voluntary euthanasia refers to a patient making the voluntary enduring demand to be assisted with the procedure of assisted suicide while involuntary euthanasia is ending the patient’s life without their consent or awareness. Euthanasia is also categorized in the approach the patient’s life was ended. Active euthanasia is ending a patient’s life by the use of drugs with or without the aid of a physician. Passive euthanasia is terminating a patient’s life by disregarding the necessary actions to maintain life such as withdrawing water, food, drugs, medical and surgical procedures. While passive euthanasia is legal in Canada, active euthanasia is considered murder and is illegal.

After asking about any nausea, vomiting, constipation, diarrhea L.J.H stated, “At this moment I do not have any problems with nausea, vomiting, constipation and diarrhea, but when I first arrived at the hospital I did feel sick which lead to me vomiting. I think it was because of my abdominal pain.” When asked what L.G.H’s typical diet would be she stated, “In the morning I will usually have eggs, toast and milk with some hot water. For lunch I usually eat leftovers from the night before or just make myself and sandwich. I don’t really each a lot of snacks. For dinner I usually have something with protein or starch with a side of veggies. I am usually good at eating what is okay for me. I have a lot of allergies so I don’t like to change up what I eat a lot.” After asking about alcohol or caffeine use L.J.H stated, “I never drank alcohol and I avoid caffeine.” When asked about the use of stool softeners at home L.J.H stated, “No I do not use stool softeners.”

First of all, terminally ill patients have the right to decide what happens with their life. Of recent suicide and attempted suicide have been their bodies are shutting down. Their organs stop working and they cant do everyday actitities without seviere pain. According to the federal constitution, every citizen is entitled to life liberty are the persuit of happieness. Due to court case Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, the Supreme Court established that the due process clause protects a patient's liberty to refuse medical treatment. According to that statement, this means a patient can refuse medical attention and ultimately die (Is There a Constitutional..). Not alowing a patient this right would be unconstitutional. What

Euthanasia, formally known as mercy killing, is the act of intentionally causing the painless death of a sick person, rather than allowing that person to die naturally. In terms of a physician's actions, it can be passive in that a physician plays no direct role in the death of the person or it can be active in that the physician does something directly to cause the death (Yount, 2002). Euthanasia may also be formed into three types of act, which are voluntary, involuntary, and nonvoluntary. Voluntary involves killing the patient at his or her request. Involuntary occurs when the patient does not give consent, or refuses. Nonvoluntary is where the patient is not able to make the decision about their medical treatment so it is up to a third

I will be discussing the criteria needed to legalize physician-assisted suicide by applying different moral theories. My main argument is supported by care ethics, but I will also be using Utilitarian, Kantian and Disability ethics to support legalization. Provided that the patients are competent and fully informed, physician-assisted suicide should be legalized in strict circumstances where life-ending treatments are the only or best way to care for a person.

There are many classifications of life ending decision on the basis of the person involved, whether or not it is legal and so on. The different classifications are very much similar to one another and can be confused as assisted suicide. Different life ending decision includes assisted suicide, voluntary or involuntary active euthanasia, voluntary or involuntary passive euthanasia and non-voluntary euthanasia (Cassity, 2009). Voluntary active euthanasia is similar to active suicide, but in this other person is the one who does the death causing act. When the person has intension to die and he/she refuses the life sustaining medical treatment, it is known as voluntary passive euthanasia. When another person is the cause of patient death without the consent and will of the patient, it is known as involuntary active euthanasia. If another person withholds or withdraw life-sustaining medical treatment against the patient’s will think it is involuntary passive euthanasia. Non-voluntary euthanasia is also known as mercy killing. It is conducted when the patient is not able to give consent because the person is in a vegetative state or is incompetent to give consent (Cassity, 2009).

Voluntary euthanasia; This means the patient has giving consent to have their life voluntarily ended, to prevent further suffering. For example, a doctor gives the patient a lethal injection after receiving consent to do so.

In the article ¨ Euthanasia, Physician-Assisted Suicide, and Other Medical Practices Involving the End of Life in the Netherlands,1990-1995¨ written Paul J. Van Der Maas, Gerrit Van Der Wal, Ilinka Haverkate, Carmen L.m. De Graaff, John G.c. Kester, Bregje D. Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Agnes Van Der Heide, Jacqueline M. Bosma, and Dick L. Willems in the New England Journal of Medicine talk about the first two nationwide studies of euthanasia cases and physician-assisted suicide, how how many people have took part in it. Even though it's still technically illegal, physician-assisted suicide in cases where patients have euthanasia has become an increasing practice in the Netherlands. In the early 1990's, a nationwide study of euthanasia and other

This has three subgroups: Nonvoluntary euthanasia, which is done when the patient is incapable of deciding, involuntary euthanasia, which is done to end the suffering of a capable patient, and voluntary euthanasia, which is done at the patients request (Yount). A broader term many people assign these two acts to is suicide. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines suicide as “the act of killing yourself because you do not want to continue living.” Euthanasia is a form of suicide, but the two differ in their motives for death.

To clarify, active voluntary euthanasia occurs when a medical practitioner deliberately and directly causes the death of a patient with means such as with lethal injection. Physician assisted suicide happens when patient-requested, pharmaceutical means are provided for that patient to end his or her own life (Emanuel, Ezekiel J., et al. "Attitudes and practices of