The Problem Of Moral And Ethical Issue

Death with Dignity is the use of medical practices to end the life of someone who is suffering from severe illness. It was reported on November 2, 2014, by People and various other media sources that Maynard had ended her life on November 1 surrounded by her loved ones. In accordance to Oregon state law regarding death with dignity, a brain tumor is recorded as the official cause of death on her death certificate.The problem with this is that many people believe that it should not be legal for one to chose whether or not they should die. Individuals throughout the U.S. and many other countries believe we should not have the choice of when we die, and that it should all come naturally. In addition to that, many people were conflicted between the idea of suicide and a person dying. The reason for this opposition is because it goes against many religions. For example, Christians believe that it is a denial of God’s power and presence. Even though there is much controversy about this topic, I believe that Brittany made the right choice. Although I do not think the ending of a life is vigorous, I think in certain situations it is justified. She decided to get this treatment in Oregon, where “ Death with Dignity” is legal. As a human being, she has the right to take this option since it is a law. On top of that, it is a right that was afforded to her. Furthermore, she was going through a pain that a normal human being couldn’t even imagine bearing. She was only given six months to live due to her terminal illness, and would only get worse over time. This was the right course of action because she died on her own terms, peacefully, legally, and around those that she loved. This issue (Death with Dignity - Euthanasia) has sparked all across the globe, making many others individually think, is Death with Dignity right or wrong. Is there a difference between someone

Physician-assisted suicide was first made legal in the state of Oregon. (Hendin) In cases of euthanasia, physicians often give lethal doses of a medication to terminate a patient’s life because they’re experiencing intolerable pain. Patients who wish to use the Death with Dignity law in Oregon must be eighteen or older, must be a resident of Oregon, and they must be able to make their own health care decisions. (Sharp 53) However, the law does not require the patient to be in unmanageable pain, they must just have a prognosis of less than six months to live. (Sharp 54) This law seems to be in place to kill patients more quickly to open up hospital space, instead of compassionately ending someone’s suffering.

Brittany Maynard was one of the people to use the Death with Dignity Act in Organ and once said,“To have control of my own mind…to go with dignity is less terrifying. When I look at both options I have to die, I feel this is far more humane” (Sandeen, 2014). No matter what, we will all eventually die, but we should have the right to die as humanely as possible. The Death with Dignity Act is an end-of-life choice possibility for terminally ill patients to be given the freedom to decide for themselves what it means to die with dignity. This act allows them to die with dignity by providing them with lethal medications prescribed by a physician (The Oregon Department of Human Services, 2006). The Death with Dignity Act started to allow people with six months or less to live, the right to die in a manner and at the time of their own choosing. Also, even though modern medicine has benefited humanity greatly, it cannot completely resolve the suffering and distress that comes with the dying process, so Death with Dignity can provide a painless end-of-life choice for suffering individuals (Humphry, 2009). Although Death with Dignity is a controversial topic I feel it can be very beneficial especially since people go through a long process just to try to get the medication and the ones that get it really need it. I chose this topic because death always has been interesting to me and I one day hope to have a career

In journalism, an ethical dilemma is a complex issue or situation that often involves an emotional and psychological conflict between moral obligations and duties, in which to obey one would transgress the other. Within the media there are many stories that can be deemed an ethical dilemma; some more so than others. One of the most recent and prominent ethical dilemmas was the worldwide coverage surrounding the shooting of two American WBDJ journalists, Alison Parker and Adam Ward. Despite the fact that the shooter filmed the ordeal clearly showing the two slain journalists being shot, news outlets had picked it up and ran with the story, which ultimately went viral in minutes. This essay will analyse and thoroughly examine the reporting

Because her body was young and healthy, she was likely to physically stay alive for a long time, but the cancer was eating her brain which would have caused her to suffer in hospice care for months while her family watched her deteriorate slowly. Even with palliative medication, she could develop morphine-resistant pain and lose her verbal, cognitive, and motor skills at any time. For her, that seemed like a nightmare to put her family through. She wanted to live the rest of the life she had left to the fullest, surrounding herself with family and friends, doing things she had always dreamt of doing and saying goodbye to her loved ones in her own time. Much like Dr. Rimmel, Brittany’s quality of life was critical to her happiness. Because the state of California has not authorized death with dignity. Brittany and her family had to move from their home to Portland, Oregon. Oregon was one of five states where death with dignity is legal.

In 1997 Oregon arranged to enact the Death with Dignity Act. This act allows people who are residents of Oregon to end their own life through the voluntary self-administration o lethal medications, as prescribed by a medical professional who specifies in this area of healthcare. The Oregon Death with Dignity act requires that all physicians, patients and other professionals to submit patient information, data, and annual statistical reports to the Oregon Health Authority.

Today, assisted suicide also known as the Death with Dignity Act has become legal in nearly four U.S. States, the act has legalized the ability for terminally ill patients to determine the time of their death. Since the act becoming legal the amount of patients that participated in it grew 65 percent. The act does come with it’s flaws, but it does ensure major things such as; patients can put an end to pain and suffering when they no longer have hope to of recovering, they can arrange for final good-byes with loved ones, and the act prevents in humane suicides.

In recent news, a woman’s tragic story has gone viral. Brittany Maynard is a woman with terminal cancer who has announced that she will end her suffering and die with dignity through the process of physician assisted suicide. She is making the dramatically difficult decision to do this and she is not taking it lightly. However, the majority of the public is extremely outraged by her personal decision. They are outraged because they see her giving up on life and on her friends and family. However, she says that this decision is completely the opposite. Whatever views anyone else has on the topic, everyone in this situation, whether it be very low quality of life due to old age, terminal illness or chronic pain that is sure to end in tragedy,

In 1997, Oregon was the first state to pass the Death With Dignity Act. To qualify for assisted suicide,

A dignified option became available to terminally ill Americans in 1994. By a vote of 52 to 48 percent, Oregon became the first state to pass The Dying with Dignity Act (Munson, 2016, pp 566). The Dying with Dignity Act, also known as physician assisted death (PAD), allows qualified terminally ill patients to end life in a dignified manner by permitting Oregon physicians to prescribe medications that will induce death (Munson, 2016, pp 566). The passing of this law began a movement for the dignified death. Many states would soon follow Oregon’s lead. Washington, Vermont, Montana, New Mexico, and seven other

Brittany Maynard was 29 when she was diagnosed with a malignant terminal brain tumor. Her doctor gave her six months to live. She had the option to undergo full body radiation treatment that would have lengthened her life but would have left her in constant pain while she withered away. She consciously made the decision that she wished to die on her own terms and moved from California to Oregon where physician-assisted suicide has been legalized. In the early morning hours of a chilly November morning, Brittany took a cocktail of drugs prescribed by her physician. She was surrounded by those she loved and died with the dignity that she wanted. Human euthanasia, although controversial, is a humane way to end a person's life, it can be administered voluntary, involuntarily, or passively.

According Eyder Peralta, an author of NPR, 29 year old Brittany Maynard was diagnosed with an incurable brain tumor. She had favored a peaceful death over living for a few months longer because she did not want to deteriorate in hospital care for the rest of those months and have her family watch. So she traveled from California to Oregon to get a prescription from a physician to end her life since it was illegal back in 2014. Before her death, Maynard was a huge advocate and believed that “The freedom is in the choice. If the DWD is unappealing to anyone for any reason, they can simply choose not to avail themselves of it”. It gives patients like Brittany Maynard to have autonomy from their illnesses and a way to leave peacefully. I hope that one day all states in the United States would be considerate enough of the ill like Brittany Maynard to pass the “die with dignity”

“Brad is a production engineer at a bicycle company and part of his job includes inspecting broken bikes and drafting the design repairs for their repair” (Bartlett). Brad is considering replacing a broken brake cable with a more durable material, even though the customer did not request it in their order and specifically requested that “No aesthetic changes be made to the bike” (Bartlett). Brad’s manager suggests that his considered actions would go against the company’s policy of “The customer is always right.” Should Brad disobey the manager and the customer to possibly lose his job or go along with

When we look at the ethical issues, we can stream them into two categories that are the funder’s perspective and Livestrong’s perspective. The funders are in a dilemma whether they shouldcontinue funding and supporting the organization which in way has become so popular because of Lance Armstrong. Also, the other major point of discussion is whether it isethical for the funders to ask for their money to be returned considering the fact that the scandal took place in Lance Armstrong’s personal life and not within Livestrong. Now, if we look from Livestrong’s perspective, we can question whether it was ethical to completely cut ties with the founder of their organization.

This paper will explore ethics, patient rights, cultural considerations and ethical dilemmas and how they are present or not in the case of J.M a 48-year-old male Navaho tribe member who was brought into the unit with suicidal ideation and has a diagnosis of alcohol abuse. This patient has refused the psychotropic medications prescribed to him on the unit. The psychiatrist told the nurse to hide the medicine in his food. The evening nurse hid the medication in the food. When he noticed the pills, he turned the table over and was put in restraints. This case is an example of an ethical dilemma where the nurse wanted to follow orders but it contradicted with the patient’s cultural beliefs with healthcare it also has a violation of ethics, violation of patient rights and a violation of the law.