Question

The word "euthanasia" draws its roots from Greek meaning "good death." As it is used in this discussion, it means "the act of ending the life of a person suffering from either a terminal illness, or an incurable disease." The American Medical Association (AMA) is against physicians assisting in euthanasia. Only a small number of states allow for euthanasia. Euthanasia advocates stress that it should be allowed as an extension of a person's autonomy. Those who are against euthanasia often say that it can lead to the devaluation of human life and to a slippery slope, in which the old and disabled will be killed on the whims of healthy people.

Consider the following case:

A woman was diagnosed with a motor neuron disease (the same disease that Stephen Hawking had) five years ago. This is a condition that destroys motor nerves, making control of movement impossible, while the mind is virtually unaffected. People with motor neuron disease normally die within four years of diagnosis from suffocation due to the inability of the inspiratory muscles to contract. The woman's condition has steadily declined. She is not expected to live through the month and is worried about the pain that she will face in her final hours. She asks her doctor to give her morphine for pain if she begins to suffocate or choke. This will lessen her pain, but it will also hasten her death.

1. Is the short amount of time she has to live ethically relevant? What is ethical difference between a patient dying in 6 hours, dying in a week and dying in a year?

2. Is the right for a patient's self-determination powerful enough to create obligations on the part of others to aid her so that she can exercise her rights? She clearly cannot kill herself (she can't move), but should a medical professional be obligated to help her?

3. Should the money used to care for this woman be taken into account when she is being helped? Will people feel that they need to end their lives earlier to save money? Explain.

4. If you were the physician, what would you do? If you pass her off to another doctor knowing he or she would do it, does this free you from your ethical obligations? Why

Answer 1

1. NO, with in short period of time she has to live is not ethically relevant because there may be chance of that she may live few hours more with the medication and better care.Yes,there is an ethical difference between her dying in 6 hours or with in a week.

2. Yes, the self determination of the patient is so powerful to create obligation on the part of other to aid her so that she can exercise her right because she cannot kill herself or she has to search someone to help her.

3. No, based my decision is the money should not to be taken into her account because the money given here to take of her.The money which is applicable till how much care should be provided after that no money should be taken from her.Legalization of the euthanasia will create the conflict of interest for the patient and also for physicians because no one should be favor for this.Yes people may feel that its better to end life instead of wasting money if their was not recovery or outcome.

4. If i was the doctor it is my legal responsibility to meet the patient needs. It is not ethical to made provider to shift patient to another physician for this service.Doctors procure designation is to save life of the patient not to kill.The ethical decision and patient beneficence outweigh was made. Moreover passing the responsibility to other dies not to obligate ethically.