Analysis of an Ethical Dilemma Essay

One very debatable respectable quandary in todays society is mercy putting to death. Euthanasia, like any other(a) aesculapian treatment should be seen as a option. As a society, on that point are obligations to the sick that should be up held, but morally and lawfully whitethorn non be financial supportable. There are many aspects that go with this choice besides the obligation. There are overly stakeholders to consider as well as affable values, morals and ghostly implications. Euthanasia is Greek for good death which translates into English as easy death or mercy killing. It was accepted by the ancient Greeks and Romans. Three Asian ghostlike traditions accept euthanasia Buddhism, Shintoism, and Confucianism. It was rejected by the 3 main mo nonheistic religions Christianity, Judaism and Islam. It has its supporters and opp anents in all countries. Two types of long-sufferings are come to in euthanasia (a) a diligent in a persistent vegetative put forward who is awake but is not aware of self or the environment. much(prenominal)(prenominal) a longanimous has no higher brain functions and is kept bouncy on artificial keep support (b) diligent in entrepot illness with a lot of pain, psychological suffering and sack of dignity. The patient may or may not be on invigoration support. There are unalike types of euthanasia. Active euthanasia, an cloak of commission, is taking about action that leads to death like a fatal injection. Passive euthanasia, an act of omission, is letting a soul die by taking no action to maintain life. Passive euthanasia puke be withholding tax or withdrawing water, food, drugs, medical or surgical procedures, resuscitation like CPR, and life support such as the respirator. The patient is then left to die from the be disease. Sometimes a distinction is made between normal victual and hydration on one hand and medical nutritional support involving endovenous and naso-gastric feeding on the other hand. Eu thanasia can be by the patient or by the health electric charge giver. Euthanasia can be voluntary when the patient takes the decision, non-voluntary when the decision is made by many other soulfulness for an unconscious patient and involuntary when the decision is made unlike to the patients need.There are ethical implications of European and American arguments for and against euthanasia. Two arguments are made for active euthanasia (a) mercy killing because of pain, psychological and physical suffering (b) the utilitarian argument is that euthanasia is suited because it relieves the misery of the terminally ill. Two arguments are made against activeeuthanasia (a) killing is morally wrong and is forbidden by religion (b) surprising cures or procedures may be discovered to reverse the terminal condition. Nurses are the gatekeepers of the healing facility, although they may pay off their own outlooks based on their own ethical, cultural, and religious views (LeBaron, 2010). There are al miens value conflicts when it comes to euthanasia, which can be demonstrated by examining utilitarianism and rights. The nursing normal should be to keep patients alive, do no harm, do everything possible to save the life, and do good to everyone by respecting the right or autonomy of the individual patient.Although most of Americans presently believe that physician-assisted suicide should be legal and no existing federal laws prohibiting the practice of euthanasia in United States, voluntary/assisted euthanasia is til now considered illegal and killing in all of the States but in surgery, upper-case letter, and before long t (Webster, 2009). First, Oregon and recently Washington passed a Death with high-handedness Act and are actually the only places where euthanasia in terminally ill patients is legally and openly authorized (Blizzard, 2012). In 2009s Baxter v. Montana case, the Montana Supreme Court declared that no law in state constitution stops patients f rom practicing voluntary/assisted euthanasia (OReilley, 2010). some(prenominal) time the legislature can act to join Oregon and Washington in the public arena. According to both States laws, an adult competent patient must address triplet witnessed solicitations, two verbally and one in writing, to his/her attending physician for a fatal medical specialty. Then the patient administers the pane on her/ his own.Obviously, the Death with high-handedness Act unambiguously bans assisted euthanasia that obliges another person than the patient to take part in administering the medication (Exit International Australia, 2012). As euthanasia is observed from a diversity of different perspective, the stake holders opinions are considered. In front comes the patient who wishes and passs to discontinue her/his life in respect to human right to select the time and stylus of death when she/ he is terminal ill by stopping unwanted, heavy and/or futile medical treatment. Other people entrust ed with the euthanasia dilemma include physicians/healthcare professionals, the family, insurance companies, religious groups, and the government. The second stakeholder is families that have to drive and follow the desires of their loved one to die in nobility. The involvement in this kind of decisionmay be an unbearable load for some families who would be would be either not ready to let their dearie one go, which could generate a catch-22 mainly if they are bending patients wishes, or emotionally scarred by the death.Other stakeholders in this situation are physicians and other practitioners who might come across a real impasse because the euthanasia breaches the do no harm Hippocratic Oath. The insurance companies may drive the patient in opting for death to preserves the money on an individual who does not hope of staying alive. Some religious groups are against euthanasia and consider it a suicide. Lastly the government intervenes in the stake holder in this state of affairs in antisubmarine position for citizen from illegal measures. Voluntary/assisted euthanasia is an ethical dilemma, and creates issues and disagreements amongst those involved (Gore, 2012). Netherland and Belgium are the two countries in the world to legalize euthanasia. In the US, Oregon and Washington also legalized euthanasia. The main barriers to legalize euthanasia are the government, religion, fear, raising and the media. More religious people are against euthanasia.Education also plays a major role in euthanasia. The more genteelness a person has he/she believes all individuals have the right to autonomy and therefore the person has the right to decide to end their life. Euthanasia has pros and cons. Pros include stand-in from pain, relief from low quality or vegetative state of life, relief from financial strain on health care system and the resources can be used for other people. The cons include family segments can kill another family member if they dont like them or r educe financial burden, loss of respect of human life and according to religious view deity can only choose when to end life. In Euthanasia legalized countries, such as palliative care admits in Belgium have important roles and responsibilities in working with euthanasia requested by patients and their families. The nurse involvement starts when the patient requests to euthanasia and ends by supporting family and loved ones.They are in list positions to provide valuable care to the patient and family. Nurses assist the health care team after the life threatening procedure. Pain management and hassock care are their main goals at that time. Nurses are open-minded and have unique relationships with the patient and family. In the twentieth century, a number of social and technological changes made euthanasia a morally acceptable choice to growing numbers of people (Wells, 2006). There are twotypes of ethical theories that are going to be focused on. The first is utilitarianism, whic h is an action that is morally correct if its consequence is good for the sterling(prenominal) numbers. It generally focuses on the greatest good for the greatest number, and neglects the individual rights. The other possibleness is called deontology, which takes into consideration the way something is to be done and not just on the consequences of that action. One may tell a lie to the doctor, just to save a superstar but doesnt think of the grave consequences they have to suffer afterward on.A person making a voluntary euthanasia uses the utilitarianism theory when making such a judgment. One might choose to voluntarily do euthanasia if the person has reached an all-time low and the only other option is to the act. The person has to have thoroughly thought about the consequences and limit sure his or her judgment is not biased or is not taken personal. There are certain conditions that apply for one to request voluntary euthanasia. Conditions are an unlikelihood of recovering from a cure, suffering from a terminal illness, and most importantly, they must have a voluntary wish to die. As can be seen by the multiple views of the authors, euthanasia is not an easy topic to side on. Due to many religious beliefs, one may feel euthanasia is wrong. But as a nurse that sees suffering every day, this same person would support euthanasia if not condemned by his/her religion. With the support of the do no harm belief, it can also be construed that assisting in euthanasia is not doing harm, but preventing harm for those with inveterate severe pain. There is no nationwide movement for the majority of the states to devolve for euthanasia, but thankfully there are two, soon to be three compassionate states that have in-acted this law.ReferencesBlizzard, R. (2002). Right to die or dead to rights? Retrieved from http//www.gallup.com/ pollard/6265/Right-Die-Dead-Rights.aspx?version=print Euthanasia The nurses role (2011). Issues in nursing. Retrieved on 10/3/12 from Nu rsing students 417.wordpress.comExit International Australia (2012). Death with Dignity in Oregon (soon to be Montana. Retrieved from http//www.exitinternational.net/page/USA Gore, J. (2011) Stakeholders in Euthanasia. Retrieved fromhttp//jacktgore.edublogs.org/2011/08/03/stakeholders-in-euthanasia/ LeBaron Jr, G. (2010). The moral philosophy of euthanasia. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http//www.quantonics.com/The_Ethics_of_Euthanasia_By_Garn_LeBaron.html Purtilo, R., & Doherty, R. (2011). Ethical dimensions in the health professions (5th ed.). St. Louis, MO Elsevier. Task Force on the Nurses Role in End-of-Life Decisions, 2011. (2011). Journal of Social operate Values and Ethics, 8(1). Webster, B. (2009). Assisted Suicide/Voluntary Euthanasia. International debate education association. UK. Retrieved from http//www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_print.php?topicID=55 Wells, K. R., Frey, R. (2006). The gale encyclopedia of nursing and allied health ed. In J. L. LONGE (Ed.), (2 ed. , Vol. 2, pp. 993-996). DETROIT, GALE