Very simple what the ethical ramifications regarding Euthenasia? Although in hospitals patients have many rights, they don't have a right to die. However what about suffering should we consider this practice if a patient is in tremendous amount of agony even if they consent to it? What are some of your thoughts?
I think that autonomy is important, and each individual has the sole rights over matters regarding their self preservation. No one has claim over the rights of others, and such things as slavery and murder are examples of such wrong doing.
With regards to life and death, only person A truly knows what it means to be person A, and thus has claim to the decisions regarding what happens to that life. No one else can claim to know that life in such a way that equals or betters their internal perspective.
Unfortunately, with regards to taking ones own life, even though you have the right to do so, you cant really follow through with it. Because person A is defined by that life they have, and its the source of the rights they hold, so the process of death involves a loss of everything that makes someone who they are. To become not A lies outside the realm of life and the rights life creates. It isnt truly sensible for person A to correctly assess a situation and what it means to not be A. Its sort of the impossible informed decision.
To put it slightly differently, reasons that would lead to the taking of your own life can never add up to the worth of life, to that individual.
Essentially its impossible for the individual to really ask himself, what it would be worth for me to be dead, because to be dead means to no longer be themselves. And so they cant intelligible comment on a state of not being themselves.
Of course thats not to say people physically cant take their own life, because clearly that happens. I think such examples will all involve coercion of sorts.
I mean the stock medical ethics is a mix of, do no harm, respect autonomy and be fair in treatment.
Palliative care and pain management is what's done for people who are terminal. Keep them comfortable, and stop 'treating' in the sense of life prolonging treatment, when there is no prospect of cure or improved quality of life. Decisions made in conjunction with patient wishes.
Patients can make a DNR form (Do not resuscitate), indicating their wishes to not be brought back as it were. These need to be very specific, and basically, if there is any doubt or ambiguity, you save them.
e.g. someone with terminal cancer and 4 months to live might want a DNR, but then just say something like 'in the event of needing life support, do not attempt to resuscitation me'. But in the following days, he might get knocked over by a car, an unforeseen complication, and thus, because the DNR doesnt expressly cover this event, you cant assume they wanted it to, and so you must save them.
I think we can all imagine the situation where aiding the death of a suffering individual seems reasonable under the circumstances. I mean we hold that standard for many animals, who are equally able to suffer as we do.
Its a fine line between being ok, and not. And it is in a way, too much power for an individual to hold as part of a job description.
Whatever, it is most defiantly a last option, and shouldn't be perused before exhausting other options.
Alex
