One of the current debated topics in the medical field, for doctors and physician's assistants, is of euthanasia. 1. So the question is: Is it ethical for doctors to practice euthanasia?
2. There are obviously two sides to this question, one being it is unethical for physician's to remove a patient from life support, no matter if they are suffering or in a coma. This side believes that this is an intentional killing, rather then letting the patient die naturally. Some of the objections that people that are against euthanasia are; There isn't a reason for someone to die in pain anymore because we are becoming very good at blocking pain with medication (Palliative Care). Another objection is that we, as physician's and family, don't have the evidence that a dying person really wants to be assisted in death and whether the dying person is competent or enduring enough to make that decision.
On the other side of the fence, for the people who believe that euthanasia is ethical, there are a number of reasons they believe in it. There is list of requirements that the patient must be experiencing in order to practice euthanasia. 1. The patient is suffering from terminal illness 2. The patient is unlikely to benefit from the discovery of a cure for their illness during the remainder of their lifetime. 3. The patient is suffering intolerable pain of has a very burdened life because of the disease. 4. Is unable to commit suicide on their own.
3. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/
4. My position on the topic is with the against euthanasia side. I do believe that people that who are suffering or have a terminal illness should be allowed to die naturally. The patient, at times, isn't fully competent with their decisions and will possibly want to take the 'easy way out'. But I am not one for that. There are medical miracles everyday around the world, and who knows when and where the next one will be. Also, having the courage to actually purposely kill someone is not in me. The patient's family still loves them and enjoys every second that they have left on earth. It's difficult for me to be able to take not only someone's life, but the happiness of others, no matter the situation.
5. My comment: "When you come to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on." -Franklin D. Rosevelt
1. Strong
ReplyDelete2. Strong
3. Medium
4. Strong
5. I would probably use one or two more references and try to get as much information as possible. Good arguments though. Good work.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. M
3. S
4. S
5. I think that a major arguement that you could have brought up were the medical costs, while the patient is under a hospitals care. The cost of keeping someone alive who does not want to be living seems unreasonable.
1.S
ReplyDelete2.S
3.M
4.S
5. You might want to add arguments for euthanasia like it keeps patients from suffering in pain or through treatments. Also that it reduces medical costs. Otherwise I think what you have is really good.
1. Strong
ReplyDelete2. Strong
3. Medium
4. Strong
5. You covered a lot of the arguments for both sides and stated them very clearly, but getting some references and possibly quoting medical professionals or lawyers could support those.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. S
3. M
4. S
5. A suggestion is to have more than one reference to support both sides of the argument.
1.S
ReplyDelete2.S
3.M
4.S
5. Really solid argument, I think it would have been nice to reference some kind of specific case, as there have been a few rather controversial cases in the media over the years (Kevorkian, Schiavo, etc.)
1.S
ReplyDelete2.S
3.M
4.S
5. As the above comments stated, you should probably have included more than one reference.
1.S
ReplyDelete2.S
3.M
4.S
5.Great arguments for both sides. More references would have been helpful but your points were still strong. IT would have been interesting to know if this practice is legal in any of the states.
1. Described field of interest and described question posed.S
ReplyDelete2. Both sides of argument were presented.M
3. Appropriate references were included. M
4. Defended position is described clearly. S
5. With your argument for, maybe what is needed to meet the requirements of the list.
1.S
ReplyDelete2.S
3.M
4.S
5. Good information presented. Could have a couple of more references. Very tough and controversial topic. I think a lot of peoples views may change on this if they were the ones in extreme pain with virtually no way out. It is crazy what the affect of pain has on the human body.
1.s
ReplyDelete2.S
3.S
4.S
5. what if the person is brain dead and will die when they are not on life support? is being on that natural? or has their body already died? Also, if the mind is gone, can the family really afford to keep them in the hospital and on life support.
1.S
ReplyDelete2.M
3.M
4.S
5.Lots of detail and good examples. The start of your side on the issue is a little confusing though because you state that your against euthanasia yet write someone should be allowed to die naturally. Perhaps explain your definition of a natural death because some religions don't even allow blood transfusions which is pretty different than a situation with someone terminally ill.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. S
3. M
4. S
A few more references would really help add to the strength you already of have your examples. I like the points that you brought up and your detailed information.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. S
3. M
4. S
5. Good job describing the question at hand, I would add a section describing you personal interest and how it related to the question. I'm assuming you want to be some sort of medical personnel- doctor? Also add more references, maybe add a specific example where this happened and the doctor had to choose.
1. Described field of interest and described question posed: S
ReplyDelete2. Both sides of argument were presented: S
3. Appropriate references were included: S
4. Defended position is described clearly: S
5. One Useful comment: I liked your quote at the end. I think you have good views on both sides of the topic, and know what kind of doctor you will be. Would you feel that you "purposely killed someone" if they had a "do not resuscitate"? I feel that would be very difficult to handle.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. S
3. M
4. S
5. List more than one reference. Maybe mention something about a living will; these were factors in cases such as the Terri Schiavo case in 2005
1.s
ReplyDelete2.s
3.s
4.s
both sides were well represented and your view of the situation was well reasoned. but it was just no fun.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. S
3. S
4. S
I am not sure but I think the Hippocratic oath covers some of this. I think it's summed up as "Do no harm" and I am pretty sure ending someone's life qualifies as harm.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. M
3. m
4. S
Lacking on references.
1 S
ReplyDelete2 S
3 M
4 S
Good job overall, could have used more references.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. S
3. S
4. S
5. Presented a great deal of information. Very interesting topic.
1. S
ReplyDelete2. M
3. M
4. S
Both sides were welly presented, I felt however that each could have used more content to them.