Ethical and Bioethical Issues in Medicine: Death and Dying

Ethical principles in the healthcare settings are formed to set specific values, morals and beliefs to the medical practice. The four most common ethical principles are autonomy, beneficence, justice and nonmaleficence (Health Care Ethics, 2011). Autonomy is to honor the patients right to make their own decisions. Beneficence is to help the patient advance his/her own good. Justice is to be fair and treat like cases alike. Nonmaleficence: is to do no harm.

In our country the premise of physician assisted death conjures images of suicidal madmen, hell bent on death and mayhem. The reality is, that could not be farther from the truth. So why is there a stigma on assisting patients with taking their own life? Others look at this as a dignified means to those suffering a terrible fate. There are many issues that weight heavy on the difference between physician assisted and vs. natural death. Is it cruel to let a terminal ill patient who will suffer horrendously until nature take its course? Would it be more humane to allow a patient to pass peacefully without the suffering or enduring painful end? This report will examine physician assisted death

The healthcare system is complex with nearly every decision made posing an ethical dilemma for patients, providers, and healthcare leaders. With an influx of new medical knowledge from evidence based practices and new technologies more decisions are being made available to patients and families. Terminally ill patients for instance are faced with numerous options when it comes to treatment including whether or not they end their life by terminating treatment altogether or seek controversial options such as Physician’s Assisted Suicide. The topic of Physician’s Assisted Suicide or (PAS) is very intricate with numerous pros and cons, moral ethics, and ways to address the issue within the healthcare practice.

What is bioethics? According to Michigan State University, School of Medicine, it is defined as an activity that is shared, reflective, examination of ethical issues in healthcare, health science and health policy. It is the discussion of the information that should be given to the patient and the patients right to refuse or accept that information. It involves doctors and patients but scientists and politicians and the general public. It has brought significant change but also raises new questions. In any event the topic of discussion and the purpose of this term paper is to explore biology and the ethics of this natural science. The topic of this paper is Physician Assisted Suicide; it has been widely debated amongst doctors, patients, politicians and law makers. The question that will be explored is the fact of if this is wrong or right to do. The purpose of physician assisted suicide, as well as how humans manipulated this phenomenon, and the controversy of this topic, amongst other prevalent information will be discussed. There will be some court cases that will be mentioned to prove when it should be used and when it should not be used. I will attempt to provide my position to this topic, although it may be hard to do so. Laws in which PAS can be done will be mentioned as well as other alternatives to it. I hope and pray this is sufficient.

The article “When a Patient Discusses Assisted Dying: Nursing Practice Implication ,” discusses some of the ethical and legal issues regarding patients who are interested in assisted dying . The subject of assisted dying in the media, nationally and internationally, is argued on both sides. Britney Maynard was a patient with incurable brain cancer who blogged about how she moved to Oregon to receive the lethal prescription. The article discusses how patients feel mentally after receiving the news of their terminal illness and how it can lead to depression. Depression can compromise patients’ decision making, especially while being in a hospice setting. Also, patients’ choices can change as they near the end of their lives. Most patients would rather spend their last days at home where they can make their own

At the start of this this course, I did not think much of how bioethics and legal medicine were connected. Week after week I am beginning to understand how important it is to evolve into a society with guidelines to better serve not only physicians but, all patients as well. In “Medical and Ethical Encounters” by John R. Carlisle, he enlightens us on how in actuality, good practice in law and medicine, is the gateway to superior health care in the united states. In the mid-1970s Beauchamp and Childress formulated a statement known as “the four principles of bioethics. Autonomy of a person to have his say respected by the physician is vital. Beneficence, to always promote health and wellbeing ultimately with an outcome of good over bad. Nonmalfeasance

The Principle of Autonomy states that patients should have the dignity to be able to make decisions when it comes to their own treatment. (Taking Sides, p. 176). A physician must receive informed consent from their patient before they can move forward with any treatment plan. The Principle of Autonomy also goes on to say that if a doctor were to treat a patient without their consent, they would be treating the patients like an object instead of a human being. If a patient is unable to speak for him or herself then the doctor must perform actions that would be in the patient’s best interest, since the patient cannot make these decisions. (Taking Sides, p.176). Another ethical principle that can be discussed when talking about physician assisted suicide is the Principle of Nonmaleficence. The principle ensures that doctors avoid doing anything that may expose a patient to needless harm. Although this principle states that the physician cannot do anything harmful to the patient, there are certain treatments that can cause harm to patients, for example, surgery. This principle rules out any non-beneficial procedure

As the role of pharmacists in patient care continues to grow, the ethical challenges they face every day also increases. After the discussion with my preceptor about ethical situations that a pharmacist can experience, we decided to explore further about the controversial topic of end of life care, specifically avoidance of killing.

They were the subjects of public disputes with family members, court systems, medical professionals, the media, and society at large. Terri Schiavo, Nancy Cruzan and Karen Ann Quinlan; their names are synonymous with permanent vegetative state (PVS). The amazing technological advancements in modern medicine has been credited with keeping persons alive who in times past would have died, therefore this is remarkable for countless families. In the cases of the Quinlan’s, the Cruzan’s and many like them, families members find it unbearable to witness loved ones who linger indefinitely in PVS with little or no chance for recovery. There are many like Terri Schiavo’s parents, who value the lives of their love ones no matter how limited their

In essence, medical ethics to ensure the fair treatment of every patient regardless of their differences, it does not take into consideration the patient's beliefs. Patients beliefs and preferences should always be respected even if that may result in severe

Healthcare professionals encounter ethical decisions every day in the deliverance of healthcare for individuals with diverse values living in a culturally disparate and pluralistic society. Bioethics and professionalism are some of the few indispensable pillars of quality medical care. It establishes the foundation of how healthcare providers should treat their patients; building a trusting relationship and putting the patients’ needs first. The four main bioethical principles include respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice1. The principle of respect for autonomy is based on the ability of personal rule and freedom. Automony in the medical field refers to the ability of the patient to act intentionally, with understand, and without external restrictions that would diminish any free and voluntary act2. The notion of nonmaleficence can be summarized by the quote from Thomas Sydenham, “primum non nocere”: ‘above all, do no harm’3. Physicians are obligated to avoid doing any harm to their patients; this principle outweighs even the principle of respect for the patient’s autonomy in an incident where potential harm can occur1. The dogma of beneficence is the physician’s duty to strive to provide benefits to the patient as well as taking action to prevent or remove harm from the patient1, 5. One of the most common ethical quandaries in medicine revolves around the balance of nonmaleficience and beneficence; basically, the potential benefits of any

For the second week of module seven, I read, “Bioethics in Health Policy Development: A Primer for Decision- Makers” by Jason Behrmann. This article mainly talks about how bioethics has a growing role in decision making process in healthcare settings. The issue is that many healthcare professions have a hard time incorporating the healthcare discussion into their job. This article tries to clarify the concept of ethics in a healthcare setting. The article tries to give examples of why the decision making process should be more prominent in hospitals. The article highlights the common ethical issues in health policy and how frameworks structured upon principles of ethics can guide policy creations. The article also discusses the role of a bioethicist

How far reaching are my rights when it comes to making decisions about my own life or the lives of loved ones? Does the medical profession have a say in those same decisions? As societal views change and medical advances rapidly develop, many questions have been raised about our rights as humans to do what we please with our body, specifically in the case of euthanasia. My interest in euthanasia was peaked after watching the movie Me Before You. In the story, a man is paralyzed and decides that he cannot live in that condition any longer so he seeks to end his life by medical means. The movie ultimately makes his decision to end his life look almost beautiful, glorifying those partaking in the act. I found the topic compelling,

The ethical issue is Euthanasia, there are many groups that support or oppose this issue. Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. The different viewpoints are based around whether it is humane to assist someone in dying and whether it should be illegal for someone to assist the death of someone who has a terminal illness and are suffering incurable pain. Groups that oppose the issue generally believe that it is inhumane to end someone 's life early, these groups generally believe these people should be given care and as much comfort as possible until their last days. Groups that support the issue generally believe that if someone has lost their mental state or are suffering unbearable pain that cannot be cured, that they should be allowed the option of euthanasia because it is inhumane to make someone suffer unbearable pain if they do not need to. An ethical issue brings systems of morality and principles into conflict, ethical issues are more subjective and opinionated and generally cannot be solved with facts, laws and truth. Euthanasia is an ethical issue because there are two equally unacceptable options. It is considered wrong

Bioethics has a key role in a variety of social, political, and scientific activities. It has reshaped the medical field by introducing informed consents from the patient to the doctor. Medicine plays a role in shaping the values of society. Civilizations are organized around ways of transcending pain and suffering and achieving salvation. In our society, medicine is at the core of this vision since it helps to alleviate pain and suffering and brings us close to salvation.