Ethical And Legal Implications Of Euthanasia Essay Example for Free

Ethical And Legal Implications Of Euthanasia EssayThe term mercy obscureing is derived from the Greek nomenclature eu which means good and thanatos which means death. Hence the literal translation of euthanasia is good death. Majority of countries around the world has prohibited euthanasia in so far particular countries and states still apply this concept without much regard to the laws governing this issue. Unfortunately, cases of euthanasia still flourish because the physician conducting euthanasia is often left unharmed. Among all the countries around the world, the Netherlands has been identified as the prime country that allows the application of euthanasia in hospital cases. The outcome of euthanasia is a controversial topic in human health. Euthanasia has been associated with health check issues, as well as ethical, legal, cultural and religious issues. Euthanasia has been originally defined as a method of accelerating death of a long- hurting in order for the pa tient to ward off additional pain and misery due to his current checkup condition. Since this classical explanation is very sketchy, it is important that the different forms of euthanasia be described in detail.Voluntary euthanasia pertains to the hastening of death based on the consent that has been provided by the patient. It is a common situation in voluntary euthanasia that the patient signifies his wish to end his sprightliness because of the hardships he is currently experiencing as a consequence of his medical illness and another individual accomplishes euthanasia to fulfill the patients wishes. In the case of involuntary euthanasia, the patient remains competent is signifying his wishes and even determine what he wants to happen to himself, but euthanasia is still effected on the patient without even discussing this natural selection with him.There atomic number 18 likewise cases wherein the patient is not equal to express his wishes because he has lost his ability to communicate and non-voluntary euthanasia is conducted on the patient. The loss of ability to communicate is often observed among adult patients who are in a comatose or mentally deficient condition. The condition of not being able to communicate may also be observed among young babies that have congenital anomalies. There are also different forms of euthanasia that is based on how it is conducted.Active euthanasia pertains to the accelerating of the death process through the exercise of injecting a toxic substance that would result in death of the patient. Passive euthanasia, on the other hand, refers to euthanasia that involves the removal of preaching or the refusal in providing treatment to the patient. This type of euthanasia entails giving up the use of any life support systems or treatments and reflects an individuals intention that the patient die by and by soon after the act is performed.The word passive often confuses the public because the word connotes not performi ng any particular act but the give voice passive euthanasia technically means the induction of death through the removal of supportive systems to the patient. Several other phrases have been used interchangeably to designate euthanasia. These are physician-assisted suicide of killing, withholding treatment, mercy killing or medical futility. In physician-assisted suicide, the medical practitioner supplies the patient with a lethal substance which the patient himself administers on himself in order to end his life (Materstvedt et al. 2003). In the case of withholding life-sustaining treatment, the physician attending to the patient decides that the use of further medical equipment and medications will not benefit the patient.In addition, the decision of withholding life-sustaining treatment is also based on the patients and the familys request. about of the hospital cases that withhold life-sustaining treatment are also futile in terms of medical procedures and treatments. There i s much controversy with regards to the use of euthanasia around the world.It has been reported that majority of the physicians would support the authorization of euthanasia in medical practice. Particular countries and states have actually rejection or overturned earlier promulgations that are related to the conduct of euthanasia. In Australia, the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act was disallowed in 1997. In the state of Oregon in the United States, the Oregon Death and gravitas Act was discarded in 1999 (Miller et al. , 2004). These Acts were denied based on a number of ethical implications.One of the major issues related to euthanasia is that the throe of the patient was not alleviated correctly. It has been pointed out that there is a possibility that the appropriate palliative care was not provided to the patient hence the patient would experience pain and discomfort. The availableness of euthanasia thus influences the decisions of the physician wherein the physician would not look into the patients condition in detail because he is aware that there will always be the option of performing euthanasia in case the patient does not feel better as soon as expected.It is also possible that the amount of pain medications were below the optimal concentration that would be needed to eradicate the pain the patient is experiencing. There are also instances when a patient with a terminally ill condition is also suffering from a second medical disorder. Co-morbidities often occur with cancer patients, wherein they also suffer from major depression or another form of mental health disorder. Clinical research has also showed that patients with terminally ill conditions are more probable to request euthanasia in order to end of his suffering and frustration.It is thus important to determine whether the suffering of a patient continues due to patient inadvertence or mainly due to the illness itself. Another ethical issue related to euthanasia is that patients generally change their mind with regards to their requested treatment and wishes during the head for the hills of their ailment. It has been observed that among the patients who initially request for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, only approximately one-third of the patients remained with their decision of using euthanasia.As for the rest of the patients, they eventually changed their minds with regards to requesting euthanasia because an pick method was provided to them that changed their perception of their terminal conditions. The alternative option actually made their conditions and current lives tolerable and still worth living. If euthanasia were legalized, it would be a great loss to the human population to see a significant number of patients that would instantly resort to giving up their lives just because of the idea that there is suffering and pain due to their illness. The value of life is also questioned in the act of euthanasia.Christianity has taught that only Go d will provide and take away life hence any someone does not have the right to end an individuals life, regards of his medical condition or state. The ethical issue of the patients and the physicians rights to life are also questioned in euthanasia. In the medical Oath of Hippocrates, it is stated that a physician will do no harm to the patient and this should not be confused with the patients decision to die because this does not automatically mean that the physician has the right to kill the patient that signified his intent to receive euthanasia.The slippery slope phenomenon has been strongly linked with the issue of euthanasia, resulting in the need for a thorough sociological redirect examination of the act. Initial cases that employed euthanasia often involved hastening death among terminally ill patients. Euthanasia is secondarily provided to patients diagnosed to be chronically ill. The slippery slope phenomenon pertains to the application of euthanasia on other medical ca ses that show vague definitions with regards to futility and recovery.These medical conditions include the persistent vegetative state, which involves a patient that had undergone an episode of coma and so reawakened with a destructed brain stem. A patient in a persistent vegetative state thus presents with the inability to communicate but is actually conscious(p) and can only perform the gag reflex. The persistent vegetative state is an exception to the definition of brain death, because only one of the two major components of the telephone exchange nervous system is affected by the condition.Brain death has been classically defined as the shutting down of the entire central nervous system, including the rational cortex and the brain stem, resulting in the loss of breathing and stoppage of beating of the heart. In the case of persistent vegetative state, the patient remains awake yet has lost the capacity to perform any other motor activities. If euthanasia were legalized, this would provide physicians and family members of the patient an option to decide on whether it is right to end the life of a patient if he is in a persistent vegetative state.Other patients suffering from AIDS would also be given a spry solution to get away from their suffering of AIDS-related complications and would not learn to live the rest of their lives with AIDS. It is also alarming to imagine that if euthanasia were legalized, any elderly person may be subjected to euthanasia in order to circumvent the responsibility of caring for a senior individual. The issue of euthanasia also affects the patients trust in a physician. These medical professionals have long been perceived as skilled individuals that have a great knowledge in scrimping and prolonging the life of an individual.It is thus a normal implication that these medical professionals also have the expertise in hastening and terminating the life of an individual should he be asked to perform this or should he decide th at ending a life of a person is the right thing to do. Hence if euthanasia is legalized, patients would feel that the physician carries the option of whether he shall or shall not live. Another sociological issue related to euthanasia is that the patient may be pressured to decide on euthanasia because of his familys treatment on him (Ganzini et al. 2002).If euthanasia were legalized, any patient that feels that his illness is becoming a heart and soul to his family members may easily pick the option of euthanasia to avoid the disappointment and anguish that his family is experiencing due to his illness. As for other elderly patients who are chronically or terminally ill, they would rather avoid being a burden to their families hence they would most likely request for euthanasia. Euthanasia is also implicated with sociological issues such as the eradication of unwanted ethnic groups.The historical adventure of the mass murder of Jews by the Nazis during World War II is an extreme example of the use of euthanasia. The decision to eradicate Jews was then a political playact that was performed using a medical procedure. The incident of mass murdering of Jews by the German Nazis is also strongly associated with the concept of eugenics, or the biased selection of individuals that are allowed or accepted by society. Eugenics has also been linked with the eradication of criminals in society during the earlier centuries.