Ethical Issues Of Euthanasia - Essay Example

Euthanasia One of the issues that have been the of heated debate for some time now is euthanasia. It has been relevant in the discourse of human rights since it also affects legal and ethical issues that are pertinent to health care providers and patients. The aim of this paper is to discuss the ethical and legal controversy that concerns both types of euthanasia. It concentrates on both the opponent of euthanasia and the supporter of this practice. A number of statements for the argument on euthanasia are discussed: a compassionate response that lessens the pain and suffering of a patient that is at times mistakenly perceived to be otherwise not relievable, the independence of the patient to make his or her own choices; the legislation and regulation of practices of euthanasia that are already existing to offer protection to patients and healthcare providers. Political, religious, personal, legal and ethical views are also included. Those who are desperate to end their lives since they cannot go on in such conditions are the ones subjected to continuous suffering, among all these. Every group or person has a different point of view in regards to euthanasia. It is thus considered a controversial issue. Introduction Euthanasia is a medical concept which in simple terms means gentle or easy death. It is defined as the premeditated speeding up of the death of an individual based on a medical condition that is terminal (Butts & Rich, 2013). It is a topic that reflects one of the recent issues that are debatable and brings about many questions that need answers. Many professionals in the healthcare sector often encounter issues that are ethical when it comes to caring for patients who are considered end- of -life patients. They usually have to make a decision between unacceptable or difficult options and are normally under the obligation to use their own moral reasoning to solve this issues that are ethical. In this modern world, despite the progress that has been made both in science and technology, and in particular in the regulations and law field, there is still a lot of controversy and ambiguity over the notion of euthanasia (peaceful death). Therefore, this ethical dilemma may impose legal and ethical risk on health care providers. The legal and ethical aspects of the notion of euthanasia are commonly debated in many countries. Several opinions are offered which are based on the principles of religious beliefs and personal morality. Hence, researchers and scientists are still trying to reach a general consensus on this dilemma that is ethical in nature (Somerville, 2001). In countries that practice the Islamic faith, there are debates and discussions on withdrawing or withholding the life support therapies or giving a patient at the end of life the freedom to choose peaceful death. Healthcare providers have no protection or immunity if they decide to help a patient die based on the Islamic law. Therefore, from the point of view of Islam, a patient has no right to die voluntarily since life is an opportunity to refine the spirit and is a divine trust. Thus, nobody has the right to end a human life by interfering through active assistance (McDougall et al., 2008). Therefore, withdrawing or withholding treatment of a patient is very difficult and can never be universal without considering the social, religious and cultural factors when it comes to decision making. The incidences of death resulting from euthanasia have been found to be very different in different countries. Advances in technology used in medicine have brought about a situation where life maybe prolonged for a long time. For instance, at any one time, there are nearly 2000 people who have spent more than seven months in a vegetative state that is persistent and may never recover, in Britain alone. Few people would want to have such a fate. There is therefore a need to address the euthanasia issue worldwide in order to support and manage staff and clients who are in a situation where there is a request of death. Yet, there are no studies to discuss peaceful death or decisions on ending of life in any clinical setting. Types of Euthanasia There are two known types of Euthanasia; Active euthanasia – defined as taking measures to cause the death of a patient directly and Passive euthanasia – this is allowing a patient to die by withholding of treatment. It is further divided in to involuntary, non voluntary and voluntary. Involuntary euthanasia usually occurs when it is performed on a patient who has the ability to provide informed consent, but does not. This can be because they were not asked or they choose not to die. Voluntary euthanasia occurs when a person gives their permission and consent while non voluntary is when there is no such agreement since the patient is in a coma (Butts & Rich, 2013). Perspectives of People Who Are For Euthanasia A significant number of people in the society are usually in favor of euthanasia since they feel that this being a nation with democracy; they are free individuals and have the right to determine whether or not it is their right to determine when to end the life of a person. Supporters of euthanasia usually need to know that there is usually a legal, social and ethical impact of euthanasia on families, parents and society. The controversy occurs because of one question: is euthanasia ethical? This case rests on the fundamental principle of mercy. Very many people, including some in the medical field believe that mercy killing is more ethical to those that have endured a lot of pain resulting from terminal illnesses. There are a number of reasons to accept euthanasia as a great option; it helps the person being treated, the family of the patient and the economy of the patient’s family. It is an alternative and a choice for the decision of a patient which should be respected in order to lessen his suffering. In many countries, euthanasia is allowed in order to help in the containment of health care costs and also give everybody a right to end his or her life. A person in chronic suffering does not have a choice to live. He can opt for euthanasia to stop suffering (Moreno, 1995). People who are in the terminal stages of suffering from a disease usually have poor healing of wounds, severe pain that is uncontrollable and poor economic and ethical status and thus tend to plead for euthanasia. Therefore in this case, it allows the patients to end their continuous suffering state and end their lives in respect, dignity, peace, free of pain and in comfort when they cannot perform social, physical and emotional tasks. Supporters and advocates of euthanasia usually ask why such a patient should continue living in pain and suffering. Therefore, some arguments for the practice is the need to alleviate severe and incurable pain when it comes to terminal illnesses or quality of life that is extremely poor, thereby allowing patients to exercise their freedom of choice while also freeing up resources to aid others. A tremendous amount of nurses support euthanasia for people with terminal illnesses that are in uncontrollable pain that is extreme or other distress and for them being involved in consulting about euthanasia cases. However, they have a lot of uncertainty on their role in performing euthanasia. Nurses who were older were more likely to support the ending of life without the request of the patient than nurses who were young (McDougall et al., 2008). Many supporters of euthanasia also insist on the fact that it makes economic and financial sense. However, there is no denying how expensive care for end -of -life is in America. According to studies done, out of every one of four dollars of Medicare that are spent, the beneficiary is usually in the last years of their life. The down side of this is that this is usually a crippling debt for the terminally ill patients’ families. For more than 40 percent of families, their financial assets were less than the total bill (McDougall et al., 2008). This would certainly not be a problem if end-of-life care was worth it but in majority of the cases it is not. Medical practitioners are usually ready to confirm on how modern medicine has the ability to prolong life, but at the same time destroy its quality. To sum it up, end-of-life care tends to be traumatic, nasty, brutal and very costly putting the patients who are suffering through unnecessary and long stretches of suffering just to give them an extra few months to live. You would have to start wondering who this expenditure is really benefiting because in most cases the terminally ill patient insists they would rather die than go through the terrible and expensive treatments. Perspectives of People Who Are Against Euthanasia There is usually a more widely held and stronger opinion against euthanasia. First and foremost, society feels that it is the task of God to determine when the time of one of his creations has come. Therefore, human beings are not in a position to behave like gods and end the life of a person. They believe that if humans take it upon themselves to shorten the lives of other people, they play God. They therefore interfere with the divine plan. It is believed that as a society and as individuals, we are obligated to protect lives, especially the life of the vulnerable and innocent. This has been reasoned to pertain to the common good of the society. Another point against euthanasia is that it would lead to reduced pressure to improve symptomatic and curative treatment. The argument here is that, if euthanasia had been legalized 50 years ago, there is a possibility there would not be a hospice movement today. The direct results to minimize suffering are what led to improvement in terminal care. Also, some diseases that were terminal decades ago are now completely curable by newly developed treatments. Therefore, if euthanasia is accepted, there might be a delay by years for the possibility of discovering treatments that are effective for the terminal diseases (Somerville, 2001). It is therefore considered not proper to ask for death during moments of weaknesses. It is also believed that every person has an obligation to the society and cannot simply choose to die because that is from God alone. Conclusion Euthanasia is a very controversial topic and will thus remain a cause for concern all over the world. The right to die with comfort, respect, dignity and peace belongs to an individual and from a humanitarian point of view, cannot be ignored in spite of the numerous arguments against this practice. In as much as several facts may be presented to persuade or dissuade people, it is ultimately an individual’s belief that will allow him to think whether or not euthanasia should be legalized and performed. It is also good to remember that dying and death is inevitable and will happen eventually. There are legal, ethical, moral and social arguments in connection with euthanasia, making it a very controversial topic. The major fear of this practice is that it might become a broad area for saving the cost of health care and that condoning it could be a slippery slope towards assisted killing that is involuntary. Restoring dignity, relieving pain, giving people back control over their lives and improving quality of life is definitely way better than administering of fatal injections. There is usually relief observed in most people when they are informed that euthanasia is not an option. When fears are dealt with, symptoms properly controlled, people feel safe and appropriate emotional, spiritual and practical help is provided, it is very rare for a person to ask for death by euthanasia. References Butts, J. B. & Rich, K. L. (2013). Nursing Ethics: Across the Curriculum and Into Practice. Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. McDougall, J. F., Gorman, M., & Roberts, C. S. (2008). Euthanasia: A reference handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO. Moreno, J. (1995). Arguing Euthanasia: The Controversy over Mercy Killing, Assisted Suicide, and the "Right to Die". New York: Simon and Schuster. Somerville, M. A. (2001). Death talk: The case against euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Montreal, Quebec: McGill-Queens University Press. Read More